Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:3726 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 558 of 2025 Hitesh Netam Son of Late Shankarlal Netam Aged About 20 Years R/o Makeshwar Ward, Dhamtari Tahsil And Dist.- Dhamtari(C.G.) versus ... Applicant State of Chhattisgarh Through OfÏcer-In-Charge Of Police Station- City Kotwali, District- Dhamtari(Chhattisgarh) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. R.S. Patel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21.01.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 369/2024 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(2), 117(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 03.10.2024, the RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.01.22 10:54:05 +0530 complainant, Varun alias Lucky Gupta, was assaulted by the accused, Hitesh Netam, along with two other accused, Sanju Netam and Rohan Dhruv, acting in collusion with each other, due to 2 prior enmity. They allegedly abused the applicant using obscene language and threatened to kill him. The accused, Hitesh Netam, assaulted the applicant with a sharp iron vegetable knife, which is a piercing and cutting instrument likely to cause death if used as a weapon, and inflicted grievous injuries upon him. Based on the complainant’s report, a case was registered against the accused and the other co-accused at Police Station City Kotwali, Dhamtari, under Crime No. 369/2024, Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(2), 117(2), and 3(5) of the B.N.S. Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that total 03 accused persons involved in the present case including the present applicant and two of the co-accused persons have been granted bail by the trial Court. So far as the applicant is concerned it is stated that he assaulted the injured with knife who has sustained incised wound and lacerated wound on his thigh which is non vital part of the body and as per X-Ray report, chip fracture was found. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 03.10.2024, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that total 03 accused persons involved in the present case including 3 the present applicant. So far as the applicant is concerned it is stated that he assaulted the injured with knife who has sustained incised wounds and lacerated wounds on his thigh which is non vital part of the body, the injuries was found to be grievous in nature, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 03.10.2024, the fact that total 03 accused persons involved in the present case including the present applicant and two of the co- accused persons have been granted bail by the trial Court, so far as the applicant is concerned that he assaulted the injured with knife who has sustained incised wound and lacerated wound on his thigh which is non vital part of the body and as per X-Ray report, chip fracture was found, further the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant- Hitesh Netam, involved in Crime No. 369/2024 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(2), 117(2) and 3(5) of BNS, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed 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 fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him 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 fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, 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 fixed 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 sufÏcient 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. 8. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan