1 2025:CGHC:17440 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2159 of 2025 1. Diyabati @ Ayate Salam D/o Devisingh Salam Aged About 32 Years Caste Gond R/o Patelpara Marda Police Station Koyalibeda District - Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Station Koyalibeda District - Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate For Non-Applicant(s) : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 16.04.2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 03/2010, registered at Police Station Koyalibeda, District - Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.), for the MANISH YADAV Digitally signed by MANISH YADAV Date: 2025.04.21 15:12:19 +0530 2 offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 of IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act. 3. Prosecution case in brief is that the complainant Ravinda K.Mandavi has lodged the report on 07.01.2010 before the Police Station Koyalibeda, District - Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) stated that on the date of incident i.e. 07.01.2010 at about 01:30 PM, the present applicant alongwith other co-accused has committed offence against the police force. The present accused/applicant is one of the member in the unlawful assembly to commit the offence. It has been further alleged that the present applicant along with other co-accused was doing the firing against the police force. On the basis of the which, a crime was registered against the applicant. Hence, this application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he is falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant has no any criminal antecedents of similar nature. He also submits that on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused, the applicant has made accused in the present case. It has been further submitted that co-accused during trial has been acquitted, the applicant stated to be absconded and on the arrest warrant, she has been arrested 3 on 06.04.2024. He further submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted and the applicant is in jail since 06.04.2024. Therefore, he prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and also endorse the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant, He also submitted that the injured has sustained grievous injuries and charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of allegation made against the applicant and the fact that the applicant is a lady and the co-accused has already been acquitted and her name has come into the light in the memorandum statement of the co-accused, further the charge- sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and she is in jail since 06.04.2024, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let applicant, Diyabati @ Ayate Salam, involved in Crime No. 03/2010, registered at Police Station Koyalibeda, District - Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 of IPC and Sections 25 & 27 4 of Arms Act, be released on bail on her 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 she 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 lawh. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of BNS. (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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of BNS. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) 5 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 her in accordance with law. 9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously as possible within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 10. Office 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 Manish