Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:44996 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7031 of 2025 Nandu Rajak S/o Ghanshyam Rajak Aged About 46 Years R/o Ward No. 16, Kumhar Para, Dongargarh District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN versus ... Applicant(s) State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Dongargarh District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03/09/2025 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. 235/2025 registered at Police Station Dongargarh District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 296, 115(2), 351(2), 117(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 25, 27 of Arms Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that as per the prosecution story, 2 on 19.05.2025, the complainant, Smt. Babita Jain, lodged a report at Police Station Dongargarh stating that on 18.05.2025 at around 9:30 p.m., when Shivam Agrawal was riding his motorcycle near Adarsh School, co-accused Kailash @ Nikku Rajak used abusive language, questioning his manner of driving. When Shivam Agrawal stopped and objected, a quarrel ensued involving co-accused Kailash, Paras, and the present applicant. During the altercation, co-accused Kailash called two more individuals on his mobile, one of whom assaulted Shivam Agrawal with a knife, causing grievous injuries. Later, when Surendra Jain (the complainant's husband) was taking Shivam to the hospital, co-accused Kailash, co-accused Paras, the applicant, and two others allegedly threw stones at him, resulting in further injuries. Based on this report, Police Station Dongargarh registered a case and submitted a final report under Sections 109, 296, 115(2), 351(2), 117(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, against the present applicant and three other accused persons. Hence, the bail application. 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. He further submits that, admittedly as per the prosecution’s case, the applicant did not cause any injury to the injured, the injury, specifically a stab wound on the chest, was caused by the co-accused Paras. The applicant is in jail since 20.05.2025, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its 3 conclusion. Therefore, he 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. He further submits that the applicant along with co- accused Kailash @ Nikku Rajak and Paras, were involved in a physical altercation with the injured party, Shivam Agrawal, on 18.05.2025 near Adarsh School, during the incident, co-accused Kailash called two other persons, one of whom assaulted Shivam Agrawal with a knife, causing grievous injuries. Additionally, when the complainant’s husband, Surendra Jain, was taking the injured to the hospital, the applicant, along with the co-accused and two others, allegedly threw stones at him, causing further injuries, therefore, the 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 20.05.2025, the fact that though the allegation against the applicant is that he alongwith other co-accused persons assaulted the injured with knife, as a result of which, the injured sustained grievous injuries on his person, but the said injury was inflicted by co-accused, Paras not by present applicant, as such, the case of present applicant is distinguishable to that of the said co-accused, Paras, 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. 7. 8. 4 Accordingly, the application is allowed. Let the Applicant-Nandu Rajak, involved in Crime No. 235/2025 registered at Police Station Dongargarh District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 296, 115(2), 351(2), 117(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 25, 27 of Arms Act, 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:- (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. (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 5 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