1 CGHC010319762026 2026:CGHC:37553 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7785 of 2026 Sonu Sharma Urf Ajay Sharma S/o Jogender Sharma Aged About 30 Years R/o - Ward No. 17, Hardware Line, Behind Nehru Bhawan Police Station Supela District Durg (C.G.) .. Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O7cer, Police Station - Supela, District Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ravi Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Digitally signed by ABHISHEK ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice SHRIVAS Date: 2026.08.22 12:39:38 +0530 Order on Board 21.08.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 480/2025, registered at Police Station - Supela, District – Durg (C.G.) for the o?ence punishable under Sections 109(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, on April 26, 2025, at approximately 23:16 hours, the complainant, Rakesh Kumar Hoyani, went to the residence of the accused, Sonu Sharma, situated behind the “Jai Jalaram” shop in Supela Hardware Line, to demand the return of 2

household items that had previously been taken by the accused. Upon being questioned, the accused allegedly became abusive and assaulted the complainant with Ests and kicks. Thereafter, Sonu Sharma allegedly drew a sharp-edged knife from his waist and launched a brutal attack on the complainant with the intention of causing his death, thereby inFicting severe and bleeding injuries on his head, neck, nose, eyes, face, and hands. Upon hearing the complainant’s cries for help, his friends, namely Sanju Mishra and Dashrath Shah, along with local residents, reached the spot, whereupon the accused Fed from the scene. The complainant was immediately taken to the Government Hospital, Supela, for emergency treatment and subsequently lodged a formal complaint, pursuant to which FIR No. 0480/2025 was registered under Section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that apart from the above, the evidence collected by the prosecution is also not prima facie su7cient to establish the applicant’s involvement in the alleged o?ence. He also submits that the weapon has already been seized and the relevant forensic and medical evidence has been collected, and therefore, further custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required by the police. He also submits that the applicant su?ers from a severe seizure disorder requiring strict and regular daily administration of Levetiracetam (Levetrapal 500 mg), as evidenced by the medical purchase invoice dated April 27, 2025. Sudden discontinuation or irregular administration of the said anti-epileptic medication during custody poses a direct and life-threatening risk of status epilepticus or severe convulsions. The applicant has a documented medical history of severe mental illness, speciEcally a 3

chronic depressive condition, for which he has been undergoing treatment under the Department of Psychiatry at Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Memorial Hospital, Raipur. He has been medically prescribed antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing medications, including Risperidone and Lithium (Lithosom SR 400 mg), thereby establishing a history of mental vulnerability and diminished cognitive control during sudden stressful situations. He further submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 27.04.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, he prays that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been Eled before the competent Court. She also submits that the applicant is alleged to have assaulted the complainant with a sharp-edged knife with the intention of causing his death, resulting in serious and bleeding injuries to various parts of his body. She further submits that the incident was witnessed by the complainant’s friends and other local residents, and the complainant was immediately taken to the hospital for treatment. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the o?ence and the allegations against the applicant, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, and the fact that, as per the MLC of the injured, the injuries sustained by him have been opined to be simple in nature, coupled with the fact that the charge-sheet has already been Eled before the competent Court, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and has 4 been in custody since 27.04.2025, thereby having undergone a substantial period of incarceration, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant – Sonu Sharma Urf Ajay Sharma, involved in Crime No. 480/2025, registered at Police Station - Supela, District – Durg (C.G.) for the o?ence punishable under Sections 109(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall Ele an undertaking to the e?ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates Exed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date Exed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su7cient cause, the trial court may proceed against his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date Exed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate 5 proceedings against his, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates Exed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without su7cient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. O7ce is directed to send a certiEed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek

1 CGHC010319762026 2026:CGHC:37553 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7785 of 2026 Sonu Sharma Urf Ajay Sharma S/o Jogender Sharma Aged About 30 Years R/o - Ward No. 17, Hardware Line, Behind Nehru Bhawan Police Station Supela District Durg (C.G.) .. Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O7cer, Police Station - Supela, District Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ravi Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Digitally signed by ABHISHEK ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice SHRIVAS Date: 2026.08.22 12:39:38 +0530 Order on Board 21.08.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 480/2025, registered at Police Station - Supela, District – Durg (C.G.) for the o?ence punishable under Sections 109(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, on April 26, 2025, at approximately 23:16 hours, the complainant, Rakesh Kumar Hoyani, went to the residence of the accused, Sonu Sharma, situated behind the “Jai Jalaram” shop in Supela Hardware Line, to demand the return of 2

household items that had previously been taken by the accused. Upon being questioned, the accused allegedly became abusive and assaulted the complainant with Ests and kicks. Thereafter, Sonu Sharma allegedly drew a sharp-edged knife from his waist and launched a brutal attack on the complainant with the intention of causing his death, thereby inFicting severe and bleeding injuries on his head, neck, nose, eyes, face, and hands. Upon hearing the complainant’s cries for help, his friends, namely Sanju Mishra and Dashrath Shah, along with local residents, reached the spot, whereupon the accused Fed from the scene. The complainant was immediately taken to the Government Hospital, Supela, for emergency treatment and subsequently lodged a formal complaint, pursuant to which FIR No. 0480/2025 was registered under Section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that apart from the above, the evidence collected by the prosecution is also not prima facie su7cient to establish the applicant’s involvement in the alleged o?ence. He also submits that the weapon has already been seized and the relevant forensic and medical evidence has been collected, and therefore, further custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required by the police. He also submits that the applicant su?ers from a severe seizure disorder requiring strict and regular daily administration of Levetiracetam (Levetrapal 500 mg), as evidenced by the medical purchase invoice dated April 27, 2025. Sudden discontinuation or irregular administration of the said anti-epileptic medication during custody poses a direct and life-threatening risk of status epilepticus or severe convulsions. The applicant has a documented medical history of severe mental illness, speciEcally a 3

chronic depressive condition, for which he has been undergoing treatment under the Department of Psychiatry at Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Memorial Hospital, Raipur. He has been medically prescribed antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing medications, including Risperidone and Lithium (Lithosom SR 400 mg), thereby establishing a history of mental vulnerability and diminished cognitive control during sudden stressful situations. He further submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 27.04.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, he prays that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been Eled before the competent Court. She also submits that the applicant is alleged to have assaulted the complainant with a sharp-edged knife with the intention of causing his death, resulting in serious and bleeding injuries to various parts of his body. She further submits that the incident was witnessed by the complainant’s friends and other local residents, and the complainant was immediately taken to the hospital for treatment. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the o?ence and the allegations against the applicant, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, and the fact that, as per the MLC of the injured, the injuries sustained by him have been opined to be simple in nature, coupled with the fact that the charge-sheet has already been Eled before the competent Court, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and has 4 been in custody since 27.04.2025, thereby having undergone a substantial period of incarceration, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant – Sonu Sharma Urf Ajay Sharma, involved in Crime No. 480/2025, registered at Police Station - Supela, District – Durg (C.G.) for the o?ence punishable under Sections 109(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall Ele an undertaking to the e?ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates Exed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date Exed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su7cient cause, the trial court may proceed against his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date Exed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate 5 proceedings against his, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates Exed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without su7cient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. O7ce is directed to send a certiEed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek