Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:41269 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6454 of 2025 Loknath Kashyap S/o Maheshiram Kashyap Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Masna, Police Station - Lormi, District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh versus ... Applicant State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Lormi, District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Bharat Rajput, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.08.14 20:32:09 +0530 14.08.2025 1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 224/2024 registered at Police Station - Lormi, District - Mungeli (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323, 307, 34 of Indian Penal Code (as per charge). 2. Earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated 08.11.2024 passed in MCRC No. 2 7669/2024. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, Chandrakant Kashyap, lodged a report at Police Station Lormi stating that on 14.06.2024, while he was bringing a mixer machine home for roof construction, the accused, Loknath Kashyap, stopped the machine, used abusive language, and picked a quarrel with him. Later, around 11:00 a.m., while the complainant was purchasing additional construction materials with his father near Narendra Dhruv’s shop, both were assaulted by Loknath and another accused. The accused used sticks and spades to attack them, causing head injuries and bleeding to both the complainant and his father. Based on the complaint, FIR No. 224/2024 was registered under Sections 294, 506, 323, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. During the course of the investigation, Section 307 IPC was subsequently added. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the though the first bail application was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order 08.11.2024 passed in MCRC No. 7669/2024. He further submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.06.2024 and it is stated that the till date no prosecution evidence has been recorded and further the co- accused who has assaulted the injured by thermocol cutter was a juvenile and he has been granted bail by the competent Court and the applicant is said to have only called the injured by calling on mobile. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. Therefore, 3 he prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed. 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 applicant and the fact that this is the second bail application and first bail application was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order 08.11.2024 passed in MCRC No. 7669/2024 and further, considering that the applicant has been in custody since 14.06.2024, that prosecution witnesses have already been examined, but the trial could not be concluded due to the absconding of his brother, namely Kamal Kashyap, who was subsequently arrested on 08.03.2025 and against whom the prosecution witnesses were re-examined, further the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 8. Accordingly, the Second bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Loknath Kashyap, involved in Crime No. 224/2024 registered at Police Station - Lormi, District - Mungeli (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323, 307, 34 of Indian Penal Code (as per charge), 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 4 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 their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of BNS. (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 BNS. (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. 9. However, this Court hope and trust that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 5 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti