1 2025:CGHC:13412 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2202 of 2025 Ramadhar Tandon S/o Dayaram Tandon Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Paraswani, P.S. Palari, Distt. Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) Presently R/o Dhabadeeh, P.S. City Kotwali, Balodabazar, Distt. Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar, District – Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Adil Minhaj, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20.03.2025 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. 15/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar, District – Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that on 06.01.2025 a report was lodged by the complainant Ganesh Sonwani stating that at about 4 AM, Deepak RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 informed him that his brother Hariyali and nephew Sandeep had gone to Primary School Ground of village Dhabadeeh where they had quarrel with Deenu Tandon and Ramadhar Tandon, who assaulted them with hand and fists, Deenu Tandon has also caused injuries with a sharp edged weapon. 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 the applicant along with his son who has made an accused in the present case are said to have assaulted the injured, but as per the prosecution case, the co-accused namely Deenu Tandon is said to have caused injuries to the injured with a sharp object. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 10.01.2025 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 the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that on 06.01.2025 a report was lodged by the complainant Ganesh Sonwani stating that at about 4 AM, Deepak informed him that his brother Hariyali and nephew Sandeep had gone to Primary School Ground of village Dhabadeeh where they had quarrel with Deenu Tandon and Ramadhar Tandon, who assaulted them with hand and fists, Deenu Tandon has also caused injuries with a sharp edged weapon, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature 3 and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant along with his son who has made an accused in the present case are said to have assaulted the injured, but as per the prosecution case, the co-accused namely Deenu Tandon is said to have caused injuries to the injured with a sharp object, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 10.01.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Ramadhar Tandon, involved in Crime No. 15/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar, District – Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109 and 3(5) of the BNS, 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 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 4 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 Rajshekhar