Umeshwar Kumar Adil @ Omu Sahu S/o Gaukaran Singh Sahu Aged About 37 Years v. State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Purur, District : Balod, Chhattisga --- Non
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:31694 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5306 of 2025 Umeshwar Kumar Adil @ Omu Sahu S/o Gaukaran Singh Sahu Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Chulhapathara, P.S. Gurur District Balod, Chhattisgarh (Wrongly Mentioned As Gaukaran Singh) --- Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Purur, District : Balod, Chhattisga --- Non-Applicant Along with MCRC No. 5252 of 2025 Kaleshwar Verma S/o Radheshyam Verma Aged About 32 Years R/o Rawabhata, Birgaon, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.), (Wrongly Mentioned As Rawabhada) --- Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station Purur, District - Balod (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant For Applicants
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2025 1. The applicants have preferred these 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 RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Crime No. 49/2025, registered at Police Station : Purur, District - Balod, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 190, 191(2)(3), 296 and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 13.05.2025, the complainant Krishna Ganjir appeared at Police Station Purur and lodged an oral complaint. Based on this complaint, an FIR was registered against the accused persons. It was alleged that the complainant, who is a reporter and editor of Sandesh newspaper, along with another reporter, Amit Mandavi, had gone to Village Markatola to cover an investigation ordered by the SDM, Gurur, regarding illegal sand storage and mining. A Revenue Inspector had been deputed for the said investigation. While the complainant and his colleague were covering the proceedings, the accused persons began assaulting them, stating that due to their reporting, they had suffered considerable losses. They allegedly beat the complainant and his colleague with sticks and iron pipes. Furthermore, one of the accused persons, namely Gyan Prakash Netam, allegedly drove a highway vehicle towards them in an attempt to cause harm, forcing the complainant and his colleague to flee the scene to save their lives. Accordingly, the offence in question was committed. 3. Learned counsels for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the applicant namely Umeshwar Kumar Adil is lawfully operating a sand storage facility (Bhandaran) 3 on the land of Smt. Devki Bai in Village Petechua (Kankalin), pursuant to an agreement dated 07.03.2024. The requisite permission was obtained from the authorities after inspection, and a license fee of ₹50,000/- was duly paid for the period 2024–2030. He also submits that the applicant namely kaleshwar Verma is merely a labourer working at the said storage facility. On the date of the incident, the complainant, who claims to be a journalist but has a history of criminal conduct with three FIRs registered against him (Crime Nos. 170/2020, 366/2022, and 378/2022 at P.S. Gurur, Dist. Balod), forcibly entered the premises, demanded money, and upon refusal, began abusing and threatening to falsely report illegal mining. A scufÒe ensued, during which applicant namely Kaleshwar Verma, who was having lunch, was also present. He further submitted complaints to the police authorities regarding the complainant’s unlawful conduct. It is pertinent to mention that the other co-accused in the same case have already been granted bail by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 02.06.2025. He further submits that both the applicants have only one previous criminal antecedent in which they are on bail and applicant namely Umeshwar Kumar Adil @ Omu Sahuare is in jail since 25.05.2025 and applicant namely Kaleshwar Verma is in jail since 14.05.2025, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he pray for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the 4 charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that a reporter and editor of Sandesh newspaper, while he and fellow reporter Amit Mandavi were covering an SDM-ordered investigation into illegal sand storage at Village Markatola, the accused persons assaulted them with sticks and iron pipes, claiming financial loss due to their reporting. Additionally, accused Gyan Prakash Netam allegedly tried to run them over with a highway vehicle, forcing them to flee, therefore, the applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 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, it is noted that out of the total 09 accused persons, 07 have already been granted bail by the trial Court, but the bail of the present applicants was rejected solely on the ground that they allegedly initiated the altercation with a danda (stick), further noted that both applicants have one previous criminal antecedent each, from the years 2019 and 2020, which are old and stale. Applicant Umeshwar Kumar Adil @ Omu Sahuare is in judicial custody since 25.05.2025, and applicant Kaleshwar Verma is in jail since 14.05.2025, the charge sheet has already been filed, and the trial is
Decision
likely to take some time for its conclusion. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let the Applicants – Umeshwar Kumar Adil @ Omu Sahu and 5 Kaleshwar Verma, involved in Crime No. 49/2025, registered at Police Station : Purur, District - Balod, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 190, 191(2)(3), 296 and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 6 (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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Rahul Dewangan Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice