1 2025:CGHC:14092 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2311 of 2025 Pushpendra Sahu S/o Arjun Lal Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Om Nagar Hanuman Temple Urla Durg Tehsil And District - Durg Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through SHO Police Station Mohan Nagar District Durg Chhattisgarh (Particulars Not Properly Mentioned In English Cause Title Of The Impugned Order) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.03.2025 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 who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 461/2024 registered at Police Station – Mohan Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) offence under Sections 109, 191(2), 191(3), of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The complainant lodged a report stating that on 18.09.2024, at around 11:30 a.m., he had gone for a walk in his locality after eating. At the ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.03.25 10:25:02 +0530 2 same time, Harsh Yadav @ Bhajji and Himanshu Nishad from his locality walked ahead of him towards their house. The complainant stopped near his house, and sometime later, a commotion broke out in the locality. It was reported that an unknown person had attacked Harsh and Himanshu with a sharp object near Shri Ram Temple in Bajrang Para, Urla, Durg. The complainant then went to Shri Ram Temple and saw Harsh lying unconscious in the street in front of the temple, while Himanshu was lying unconscious in the shed of Jai Bhole Traders. Harsh had injuries on both his thighs and back, and Himanshu had injuries on his left side chest and hip. The matter was reported to the police station, and the police registered the offense and arrested the applicant. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that no weapon has been recovered from the possession of the present applicant. He also submits the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 19.09.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, 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. She submits that the present applicant, along with other co-accused persons, namely Lucky and Deepak, allegedly assaulted the injured with a knife. The allegations against the applicant are that he assaulted the injured with kicks and fists, resulting in the injured receiving grievous injuries, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 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 and the allegation against the applicant is that he assaulted the injured with kicks and fists, due to which the injured persons received simple injuries, moreover, the main allegation is against the co-accused, namely, Lucky and Deepak who assaulted the injured with knife, due to which they sustained grievous injuries, the case of the applicant is distinguished from the case of the co-accused, namely, Lucky and Deepak, furthermore, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court and he is in jail since 19.09.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Pushpendra Sahu, involved in Crime No. 461/2024 registered at Police Station – Mohan Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) offence under Sections 109, 191(2), 191(3), of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 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. 4 (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. (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 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