33453 NAFR Ankush Yadav S/o Suresh Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Ward No v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - City Kotwali, Distt. Bilaspur
Case Details
1 KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4482 of 2025 2025:CGHC:33453 NAFR Ankush Yadav S/o Suresh Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Ward No. 33, Uday Majumdar Gali, Yadav Mohalla, Tikrapara, Police Station - City Kotwali, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - City Kotwali, Distt. Bilaspur ( C.G.) --- Non-applicant(s) For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Ms. M. Asha, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. MCRC No. 4983 of 2025 Rahul Goswami @ Rahul Chheda S/o Shri Rajesh Goswami Aged About 23 Years R/o Buddh Gali Takarapara, P.S. City Kotwali, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station City Kotwali, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Karan Kumar Baharani, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/07/2025 2 1. Since the above two bail applications are arising out of same crime number and same offence so they are being heard and decided by this common order. 2. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.197/2025, registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District: Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 119(1) and 3(5) of BNS. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 15.04.2025, the complainant Adarsh Miri lodged a report stating that on the same night at around 2:40 AM, he was returning home to Tikrapara from Gol Bazar on his motorcycle bearing registration number CG-10- AR-4520, accompanied by his brother Rishabh Miri, who was riding another motorcycle bearing number CG-10-BF-7352. When they reached Yadav Mohalla, Tikrapara, 3–4 individuals signaled them to stop. Upon stopping, the accused persons started demanding money for consuming liquor. When the complainant and his brother refused to give money, the accused persons began abusing them in filthy language, issued death threats, and started assaulting them with fists and belts. As they tried to flee, leaving their motorcycles behind, the accused and his associates caught hold of the complainant’s brother Rishabh and continued to beat him with fists and belts, causing him physical injuries. On the basis 3 of the said report, Crime No. 197/2025 was registered at City Kotwali Police Station under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 119(1), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and the matter was taken up for investigation. During investigation, accused Ankush Yadav was arrested on 17.04.2025, and accused Rahul Goswami was arrested on 04.06.2025, while the remaining accused persons are still absconding. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that that the applicants are innocent person and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Ms. M Asha, learned counsel for the applicant-Ankush submits that from perusal of the FIR report, the name of the applicant/Ankush has not been mentioned, the complainant has lodged the report against unknown persons and present applicant has been arrested by the Police personal on suspicion and there is no evidence against the applicant. They further stated that the applicant/Ankush along with co-accused have assaulted the complainant by hands and firsts on account of which the complainant sustained simple injuries and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and they are in jail since 17.04.2025 so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, the applicant-Ankush has 13 criminal antecedents out of which only 06 cases have been pending against
Decision
him and rest other cases have disposed of which has been clearly explained in the bail application of para No. 4(A) further the applicant-Rahul Goswami @ Rahul Chheda have four criminal antecedents of similar nature however, two cases are not related to 4 the applicant-Rahul Goswami @ Rahul Chheda. Accordingly, they prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court moreover, the fact that the applicant/Ankush along with co-accused have assaulted the complainants by hands and firsts on account of which the complainant sustained simple injuries so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, the applicant-Ankush has 13 criminal antecedents out of which only 06 cases have been pending against him and rest other cases have disposed of which has been clearly explained in the bail application of para No. 4(A) further the applicant-Rahul Goswami @ Rahul Chheda have four criminal antecedents of similar nature however, two cases are not related to the applicant- Rahul Goswami @ Rahul Chheda as such, the present applicants are habitual offender and they are 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 facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, the applicant-Ankush has 13 criminal antecedents out of which only 06 cases have been pending against him and rest other cases have disposed of which has been clearly 5 explained in the bail application of para No. 4(A) further the applicant-Rahul Goswami @ Rahul Chheda have four criminal antecedents of similar nature however, two cases are not related to the applicant-Rahul Goswami @ Rahul Chheda and they are in jail since 17.04.2025 and further as per the MLC report of the complainant, the injuries were found to be simple in nature, conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicants. 8. Let the Applicants- Ankush Yadav and Rahul Goswami @ Rahul Chheda, involved in Crime No.197/2025, registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District: Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 119(1) and 3(5) of BNS., be released on bail on their furnishing a 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. 6 (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fails 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 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 deliberated 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. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal