1 2025:CGHC:12550 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2069 of 2025 1. Smt. Dulari Bai Dhidhi W/o Shri Sheet Kumar Aged About 36 Years R/o Ward No. 11, Bhatheli (Bhakhara), Thana Bhakhara, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 2. Smt. Ram Bai Dhidhi W/o Shri Tiharuram Dhidhi Aged About 68 Years R/o Ward No. 11, Bhatheli (Bhakhara), Thana Bhakhara, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Bhakhara, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate For State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Panel Lawyer For Objector : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 17/03/2025 1. Applicants have filed their first bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 for grant of regular bail as they are arrested in connection with Crime No. 180 of 2024 registered at Police Station – Bhakhara, District – Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 61(2) of the BNSS. 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 16.10.2024 complainant given the merg intimation regarding death of her father Bihari Lal with the averment that at about 7:40 a.m. she was cooking the food, she heard the voice of quarrel from the cattle house and found that accused Sheet Kumar Dhindhi beaten her father by Iron Patta, when she intervened accused thrown her and continue caused the injuries by iron patta as well as brick pieces due to old enmity regrading land. Based upon which, aforementioned crime was registered and applicant was arrested on 28.11.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits the applicants were arrested on 28.11.2024 which is over a month after the incident without any further significant material evidence to justify their detention. He next submits that based on a supplementary statement made by the complainant, Emeshwari Dhidhi recorded after 14 days the initial FIR. The applicants were not mentioned in the original complaint or the FIR filed on 16.10.2024 and their names were introduced later with no substantive evidence linking them directly to the alleged evidence. He further submits that there is no evidence to suggest that the applicants were involved in the actual act of violence and there is no other connecting piece of evidence against applicants. He also submits that applicants are ready to 3 abide all terms and conditions which may be imposed by this Court, while granting bail, hence, they may be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and would submit that as per charge- sheet applicants have no previous criminal antecedents. 5. Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate for the objector opposes the submission made by the applicants and raised serious objection in granting bail of the applicants. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, looking to the age of the applicants, further considering the fact that based on a supplementary statement made by the complainant, Emeshwari Dhidhi recorded after 14 days the initial FIR. The involvement in crime of the applicants were not mentioned in the original complaint or the FIR filed on 16.10.2024 and their names were introduced later with no substantive evidence linking them directly to the alleged evidence, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to enlarge applicants on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that - (a) The applicants 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 4 treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. b) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of those absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. c) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS is issued and the applicants fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (d) The applicants 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 applicants are deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE vaishali VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.03.19 17:22:18 +0530