Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:17654 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2294 of 2025 1. Santosh Vishwakarma S/o Shankar Vishwakarma Aged About 34 Years Occupation Lab Technician, R/o Kumda Colony Police Station Vishrampur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. --- Applicant(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The S.H.O. Police Station Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. --- Non-Applicant(s) MCRC No. 2577 of 2025 1. Ghanshyam Vishwakarma S/o Late Jagdish Prasad Aged About 39 Years R/o Mahourpara Ward No. 02, Police Station Manendragarh, District Koriya Chhattisgarh ---Applicant(s) Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh --- Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s)
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Gyan Prakash Shukla, Advocate and Mr. Hemant Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For Non-Applicant(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer MANISH YADAV Digitally signed by MANISH YADAV Date: 2025.04.22 11:27:54 +0530 2 Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 17.04.2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. The applicants have preferred these First Bail Applications under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 913/2024, registered at Police Station Arakshi Kendra Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 308(2), 308(7), 61(2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (Corresponding Sections 384,388, 120B of the IPC). 3. Prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant Subhash Chandra Agrawal lodged a written complaint before the Police Station Ambikapur stating that one FIR has been lodged against his brother-in-law bearing No. 90/2024 for the offence of rape by the victim. It has been further stated that the victim of the case along with the present applicants and one other co- accused namely Kamlesh Dewangan have prepared criminal conspiracy to extort money from the complainant for the settlement of case registered against his brother-in-law. It was further alleged that the complainant was told to pay Rs. 61,00,000/- from which 5,00,000/- was paid to the accused 3 persons on 24.12.2024 at Ambikapur. On the basis of which, a crime was registered against the applicants and other co- accused. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they are falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant in MCRC No. 2294/2025 has one criminal antecedent of the year 2021 in which he has been acquitted and applicant in MCRC No. 2577/2025 has no any criminal antecedents of similar nature. It is further submitted that the applicants names have come into the light in the memorandum statement of the co-accused. They further submit that the charge-sheet has been submitted and the applicants are in jail since 25.12.2024. Therefore, they pray that the applicants be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail applications and also endorse the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicants, She has also submitted that from the complainant a pendrive has been seized, in the said pendrive there is 17 audio recordings and in the audio recordings it was found that applicant Santosh Vishwakarma has demanded money from the complainant, the complainant has given Rs. 5,00,000/- to the applicants and other co- 4 accused, which was seized by the police from the joint possession of all the accused. She has also submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, they are not entitled to be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of allegation made against the applicants and the fact that the applicants names have come into the light in the memorandum statement of the co-accused and nothing has been seized from the possession of the applicants, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and they are in jail since 25.12.2024, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let applicants, Santosh Vishwakarma and Ghanshyam Vishwakarma, involved in Crime No. 913/2024, registered at Police Station Arakshi Kendra Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 308(2), 308(7), 61(2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (Corresponding Sections 384,388, 120B of the IPC), be released on bail on their each furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- 5 (i) The applicants will file an undertaking to the effect that they will 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 will 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 BNS. (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 BNS. (iv) The applicants will 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 6 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. 9. Office 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 Manish