Jamul, Bhilai, Tehsil and District Durg, (C.G.) v. State of Chhattisgarh Through The S.H.O., Police Station Jamul, Durg
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:9799 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 419 of 2025 1 - Jageshwar @ Golu Chandrawanshi S/o Late Ramdas Aged About 38 Years R/o Satnami Mohalla, Village Dhour, Police Station- Jamul, Bhilai, Tehsil and District Durg, (C.G.) 2 - Amit Kumar Banjare S/o Parmanand Banjare Aged About 34 Years R/o Satnami Mohalla, Village Dhour, Police Station- Jamul, Bhilai, Tehsil and District Durg, (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The S.H.O., Police Station Jamul, Durg (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant No.1
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Devesh Chandra Verma, Advocate. For Applicant No.2 : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.02.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 355/2019 registered at Police Station : Jamul, District- Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 341, 427, 294, 323, 186, 353 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code & 03 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 12.07.2019, at 2 around 08:45 PM, a person died on Nandini Road, Dhaur Chowk. As a result, some villagers blocked vehicles and set them on fire. Upon receiving this information, a fire brigade with registration plate No. C.G.-02-7710 was dispatched to the scene. However, it was allegedly stopped by a crowd of 50-55 people, including the present applicants, who then vandalized the truck. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that on account of death of some unknown person in the read accident, around 50-55 persons were gathered on the road and started damaging the vehicles passing on through the road and the applicants have not played any role only they were standing in the mob. He further submits that applicant No.01 has only 01 previous criminal antecedent under the IPC and applicant No.2 has no criminal antecedents. He further submits that other co-accused persons, namely, Balkishan Gayakwad and Satyaprakash Banjare have already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.03.2021 in MCRC No. 1078/2021. He also submits that the present applicants are in jail since 28.12.2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge 3 sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. She further submits that the applicants along with co-accused persons stopped the fire brigade vehicle which was going to put out the fire, near Nandni Road, Dhor Chowk and abused the employees of the fire brigade vehicle and threw stones and brick on the vehicle due to which the vehicle got damaged and the employees sustained injuries. She further submits that the applicant No.1 has 03 criminal antecedents of the year 2014, 2018 and 2020. Therefore, the present applicants are not entitled to be granted regular bail in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that though the fact that on account of death of one person in the accident, 50-55 persons were gathered and they were throwing stones and bricks on the vehicles passing on through the read and further applicant No.01 has 03 criminal antecedents of the year 2014, 2018 and 2020, but the antecedents are old and stale and other co-accused persons, namely, Balkishan Gayakwad and Satyaprakash Banjare have already been granted bail by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.03.2021 in MCRC No. 1078/2021, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court and the applicants are in jail since 28.12.2024, the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicants – Jageshwar @ Golu Chandrawanshi and 4 Amit Kumar Banjare, involved in Crime No. 355/2019 registered at Police Station : Jamul, District- Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 341, 427, 294, 323, 186, 353 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code & 03 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the 5 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan