1 2025:CGHC:9395 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1546 of 2025 Dhanaram Patel S/o Nilkanth Patel Aged About 75 Years R/o Village - Amapali, P.S.-Baradwar, District - Sakti (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - District Magistrate, District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ankur Diwan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.02.2025 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. 302/2024 registered at Police Station- Baradwar, District - Sakti, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 296(3)(5), 351(3) and 109 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (for short ‘BNS’). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, it is alleged that on 13.11.2024, due to a land-related dispute between the complainant’s father and the accused, who are relatives, the accused, along with other co- RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 accused, namely Sagar Patel, Rahul Patel, and Dinesh Patel, began abusing and assaulting the complainant’s father, Rajaram Patel, and uncle, Purshottam Patel, causing them to sustain injuries. As a result, the applicant was arrested by the police of PS Baradwar, District Sakti, on 16.11.2024, in connection with Crime No. 302/2024 for the alleged offences under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 296(3)(5), 351(3), and 109 of the BNS. 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 the applicant is the father of the co-accused persons. He also states that there was some dispute with respect to a land for which a demarcation was going on, and the applicant happens to be the brother of the complainant. The applicant’s son is also involved in the case, having assaulted the injured with a Tangi, the said act was attributed to co-accused persons and so far as the applicant is concerned, he has assaulted the injured with his hands and fists. He further submits that a cross- report of the incident has been filed, and the applicant’s side has also suffered injuries. It is stated that the present applicant is an aged person, aged about 75 years who is suffering from illness and he is in jail since 16.11.2024, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the 3 charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the present applicant along with the co-accused, assaulted the injured with a Tangi, causing grievous injuries to his body, 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 16.11.2024, the fact that though the applicant is the father of the co-accused persons and there was some dispute with respect to a land for which a demarcation was going on, and the applicant happens to be the brother of the complainant, the applicant’s son is also involved in the case, having assaulted the injured with a Tangi, and so far as the applicant is concerned, he has assaulted the injured with his hands and fists, but the said act was attributed to co-accused persons who is the son of the applicant, further the case of present applicant is distinguishable from that of the co- accused, who committed the said act, further the cross-report of the incident has been filed, and the applicant’s side has also suffered injuries, 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. Let the Applicant – Dhanaram Patel, involved in Crime No. 302/2024 registered at Police Station- Baradwar, District - Sakti, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 296(3)(5), 351(3) and 109 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be 4 released on bail on furnishing 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 the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the 5 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan