1 2025:CGHC:12064 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1545 of 2025 Lingraj @ Arun Tandi S/o- Lambu Tandi Aged About 30 Years R/o- Near Hanuman Mandir, Arjun Nagar, Near to Ghadi Chowk, P.S- Civil Line, District- Raipur, (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O Police Station- Civil Line, District- Raipur, (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Harshika Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 11.03.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 481/2024 registered at Police Station Civil Line, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 309(6) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution's case is that Md. Naushad, the complainant, filed ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.03.12 10:51:54 +0530 2 a report at the Civil Line Police Station, alleging that on 31.08.2024, at around 3:45 pm, he was driving his E-Rickshaw towards Gandhi Chowk. At Mowa, three or four unknown boys hailed him, wanting to go to Rajatalab. He quoted a fare of Rs. 20/- per passenger, and they agreed to pay. However, when they reached their destination around 4:00 pm, they refused to pay the fare, threatened him, and started beating him. They kicked him out of the E-Rickshaw, looted the vehicle, his mobile phone, and Rs. 500/- in cash. Based on the complainant's report, an offense under Section 309(6) of the B.N.S. was registered, and during the investigation, the applicant and other co-accused were arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case. She submits that the applicant has only 03 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, IPC and Arms Act. Furthermore, in one case under the IPC, the applicant has already been acquitted, while the other cases are still pending. She also submits that the applicant is in jail since 04.09.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time. Therefore, she prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further the fact that the applicant has only 03 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, IPC and Arms Act, furthermore, in one case under the IPC, the applicant has already been acquitted, while the other cases are still pending, moreover, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and the applicant is in jail since 04.09.2024, conclusion of the trial may takes some more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Lingraj @ Arun Tandi, involved in Crime No. 481/2024 registered at Police Station Civil Line, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 309(6) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be 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 his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (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 his, 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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek