Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:43596 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6747 of 2025 Digesh Kumar Sinha S/o Loknath Sinha Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Mayana, Panchayat Mayana Tehsil And P.S. Charama Kanker (C.G.) AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN versus ... Applicant(s) State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Chhawani, Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) :
Legal Reasoning
Ms. Anuja Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Soumya Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28/08/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 251/2025 registered at Police Station Chhawani, Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 108, 3(5), 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 67-B of Information of Technology Act, 2000. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 18.05.2025, the 2 deceased-Dr. Bodhesh Kumar Rathore, posted as an Ayurvedic doctor on contract at Puri village, PS Charama, District Kanker. committed suicide by hanging at his niece's husband's house in Camp-2, Bhilai. During merg inquiry, a suicide note was recovered wherein the deceased named several villagers and others, alleging They had secretly recorded an objectionable video of him with a woman, with whom he had consensual relations. The accused persons allegedly demanded Rs. 5,00,000/-, threatened to viral the video, physically assaulted him in a village meeting and local journalists published defamatory news. Thereafter, The deceased's wife submitted a written complaint stating that continuous threats. extortion, public humiliation, and harassment by the named persons drove her husband to commit suicide. The Post-mortem confirmed death due to hanging. Based on the inquiry, aforesaid offences were found made out against the named accused and FIR was registered for investigation. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. She further submits that six of the co-accused persons, who are also named in the suicidal note have already been granted bail by this Court, out of which, three co-accused, namely, Anil Kumar Sinha, Kanha Markam @ Kanhaiya and Naveen Nirmalkar have been granted regular bail vide common order dated 08.08.2025 in MCRC Nos. 6248 of 2025 and 6258 of 2025 and three co-accused, namely, Anup Kumar Verma, Lokesh Barshagde 3 and Suryakant have been granted anticipatory bail vide orders dated 07.07.2025 and 19.06.2025 in MCRC Nos.981 of 2025 and 847 of 2025. The applicant is in jail since 27.05.2025, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, she prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the deceased, who was a doctor, involved in a consensual relationship with one lady of the village and the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons allegedly recorded their objectionable video, demanded Rs.5,00,000/-, threatened to viral the said video and also assaulted him in a village meeting, which led to committal of his suicide leaving behind suicidal note, wherein applicant and other co- accused persons names were mentioned, therefore, present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 27.05.2025, the fact that six of the co-accused persons, who are also named in the suicidal note have already been granted bail by this Court, out of which, three co-accused, namely, Anil Kumar Sinha, Kanha Markam @ Kanhaiya and Naveen Nirmalkar have been granted regular bail vide common order dated 08.08.2025 in 4 MCRC Nos. 6248 of 2025 and 6258 of 2025 and three co-accused, namely, Anup Kumar Verma, Lokesh Barshagde and Suryakant have been granted anticipatory bail vide orders dated 07.07.2025 and 19.06.2025 in MCRC Nos.981 of 2025 and 847 of 2025 and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused, who granted regular by this Court, further the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Let the Applicant-Digesh Kumar Sinha, involved in Crime No. 251/2025 registered at Police Station Chhawani, Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 108, 3(5), 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 67-B of Information of Technology Act, 2000, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 7. 8. (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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 5 (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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil