Sarkanda, (C.G.) v. State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:6610 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 550 of 2025 Suraj Singh Thakur Urf Mortin S/o Shyam Singh Thakur Aged About 22 Years R/o Atal Awas Ashok Nagar Near, Water Tank Sarkanda District- Bilaspur (C.G.) Police Station- Sarkanda, (C.G.) versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Sarkanda, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant ... Applicant For Applicant For Non-applicant/State : :
Legal Reasoning
Ms. Deepanjali Tiwari, Advocate. Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 05.02.2025 Order on Board 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 610/2024, registered at Police Station – Sarkanda, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 341 read with Section 34 and 395 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, IPC). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that on 09.05.2024, the complainant, Satishwar Bareth, was sitting in front of his house with his mother, Shyam Bai, when two motorcycles collided on the road in front of his house, the riders who were injured were helped by the complainant, his mother, and other locals, however, shortly thereafter, a group of individuals including Nikhil Sahu, Mohammad Sahil, Parmeshwar Yadav, 2 Afsha Khan, Vishesh Khare, and others, arrived and demanded Rs. 2,000 from the complainant for medical expenses and food, claiming that Nikhil Sahu's accident was caused by the complainant, when the complainant refused, the group assaulted him, causing injuries to his back, left wrist, and shoulders, the accused persons also assaulted Sarita Soni, a local resident who intervened, using a sharp knife, belt, and fists, the accused individuals were armed with sharp knives and threatened to kill the complainant and Sarita Soni. Hence, this application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there are 3 criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, out of which in one case the applicant in on bail, and in one case the applicant is already acquitted. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 04.06.2024 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there are 3 criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that on 09.05.2024, the complainant, Satishwar Bareth, was sitting in front of his house with his mother, Shyam Bai, when two motorcycles collided on the road in front of his house, the riders who were injured were helped by the complainant, his mother, and other locals, however, shortly thereafter, a group of individuals including Nikhil Sahu, Mohammad Sahil, Parmeshwar Yadav, Afsha Khan, Vishesh Khare, and others, arrived and demanded Rs. 3 2,000 from the complainant for medical expenses and food, claiming that Nikhil Sahu's accident was caused by the complainant, when the complainant refused, the group assaulted him, causing injuries to his back, left wrist, and shoulders, the accused persons also assaulted Sarita Soni, a local resident who intervened, using a sharp knife, belt, and fists, the accused individuals were armed with sharp knives and threatened to kill the complainant and Sarita Soni, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there are 3 criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, out of which in one case the applicant in on bail, and in one case the applicant is already acquitted, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 04.06.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Suraj Singh Thakur Urf Mortin, involved in Crime No. 610/2024, registered at Police Station – Sarkanda, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 341 read with Section 34 and 395 of the IPC, 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 4 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 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. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Rajshekhar Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice