Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:18368 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3073 of 2025 KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN Dayalu Ram Markande S/o Gangaram Markande Aged About 45 Years R/o Kekrajbod, (Village), Police Outpost Jalbandha, Tahsil Khairagarh, District K.C.G., Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station- Khairagarh, District K.C.G., Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sakib Ahmed, Penal Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 23.04.2025 Order on Board 1. Proceedings of this case have been taken through video conferencing. 2. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 503/2024 registered at Police Station Khairagarh, Police Outpost Jalbandha District – Khairagarh-Chuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) for the offence under Section 109(1) read with Section 3(5) of BNS. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 23.12.2024 at about 2:35 2 PM, the complainant/Teejan Chandel lodged a written report before the concerned Police Station stating that she along with her daughter Santoshi Chandel and her son Jageshwar Chandel went to watch the Mandai program in their village, where on the night of 24.12.2024 approximately around 3:00 A.M., two individuals of the village/co-accused persons, namely, Kuldeep alias Pahru and Devvrat Markande got into quarrel with Jageshwar Chandel and during the fight, the co-accused Kuldeep alias Pahru stabbed Jageshwar Chandel three times in the stomach with a knife. The another co-accused Devvrat Markande also assaulted Jageshwar with a stick. Due to which Jageshwar sustained serious injuries on his stomach. Teejan Bai and her daughter Santoshi witnessed the incident along with several other people from the neighborhood. On the basis of the aforesaid, an FIR was registered for the offence punishable under Section 109(1) read with 3(5) of BNS. The Police swung into action and after completion of the investigation, filed the charge sheet on 21.03.2025 against four accused persons namely, Pahru Markandey, Devvrat Markandey, Dayaluram Markandey (the applicant) and Rahul Kurrey. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant was not assaulted the injured as the injured was assaulted by the co-accused namely Kuldeep @ Pahru and Devrath Markende and the applicant's name emerged later in the subsequent statement of the injured person. He further submits 3 that roping of the present applicant in this case is an afterthought which is depicted from the investigation conducted by the Police and the applicant has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in jail since 15.03.2025 and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence, he prays to enlarge the present applicant on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court further according to the medical report, the injured sustained grievous abdominal injuries caused by sharp weapons and sticks. Although the applicant/accused's name was not mentioned in the FIR, during the investigation, statements were recorded from the injured, Jageshwar Chandel, and eyewitnesses Kamlesh Banjare and Harsh Chandel. They stated that the applicant/accused, Dayalu Markande, held the injured while other accused persons assaulted him. This indicates the applicant's direct involvement in the crime, which is of a serious nature. Hence, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the fact and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicant and further the fact that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court further the applicant was not assaulted 4 the injured as the injured was assaulted by the co-accused namely Kuldeep @ Pahru and Devrath Markende and the applicant's name emerged later in the subsequent statement of the injured person and roping the present applicant in this case is an afterthought which is depicted from the investigation conducted by the Police and the case of the applicant is better than the case of co-accused and the applicant is in jail since 15.03.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicant – Dayalu Ram Markande, involved in Crime No. 503/2024 registered at Police Station Khairagarh, Police Outpost Jalbandha District – Khairagarh-Chuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) for the offence under Section 109(1) read with Section 3(5) of BNS., be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (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 5 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. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Kunal Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice