Raipur, Chhattisgarh v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Tilda Newra, Distric
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:34597 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.07.28 11:00:39 +0530 MCRC No. 5680 of 2025 Aashu Uikey S/o Munna Uikey Aged About 27 Years R/o Ward No. 7, Village Jalso, Police Station Tilda Newra, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Tilda Newra, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla , Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21.07.2025 1. 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. 122/2025 registered at Police Station : Tilda Newra, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2) & 3(5), of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 2 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. 2. The prosecution story in short is that complainant Nilesh Pal came to the police station and lodge a written complaint with the allegation on dated 05.03.2025 at 8 P.M. that Aashu Uikey and Balram Yadav come to home of the complainant where the complaint has repairing his vehicle through the mechanic at that juncture they are 4 person including the complainant and Aashu Uikey and Balram Yadav has abused the complainant and her aunt namely Smt. Parmila Pal and also given threating for dire consequences and also shown the knife and threatening them but the complainant and his companion not retaliate and shut their mouth there after the applicant and Balram left the aforesaid premise and due to aforesaid threatening complainant and his family member are on fear. So on the basis of the said report after 25 days of the aforesaid complainant on dated 30.3.2025 police has registered the aforesaid crime and arrest the applicant and seize one knife and filed a charge-sheet against the applicant on 26.05.2025. 3. The applicant submits that the complainant and his companion, due to prior enmity, have falsely implicated him in both the present and an earlier case. Despite multiple notices, they have failed to appear for evidence in the earlier matter, indicating an intention to delay proceedings. The incident alleged to have occurred on 05.03.2025 is a fabricated story, as the applicant neither threatened nor confronted the complainant or his companion on that date. The 3 complaint was lodged belatedly on 30.03.2025, raising further doubt about its authenticity. Only the complainant, his relatives, and one tenant have supported the version given to police, while no independent neighbors have made any allegations against the applicant. The charge sheet has already been filed, reducing any risk of tampering with witnesses. The applicant is a permanent resident of the given address, poses no flight risk, and is willing to comply with any conditions imposed by the Court while granting bai, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel, as well as the learned counsel for the objector, has opposed the bail application of the present applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature and gravity of the offence, it is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant was previously wanted in a case under Section 302 of the IPC, which was lodged by the complainant, and he has already been granted bail by the Trial Court in that case. It is further submitted that immediately after the applicant was released from jail in the said case, the present FIR was lodged against him, alleging that he attempted to threaten the complainant and witnesses, which is stated to be entirely false. Moreover, the charge-sheet in the present case has already been submitted before the competent Court, and the applicant has been in jail since 4 30.03.2025. As the trial is likely to take some time to conclude, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Aashu Uikey, involved in Crime No. 122/2025 registered at Police Station : Tilda Newra, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2) & 3(5), of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of 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 5 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 sufficient 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. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav