1 2025:CGHC:16198 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2718 of 2025 1. Anil Ghosle S/o Late Rajkumar Suryavanshi Aged About 24 Years R/o Ward No. 16, Village Madai, Police Station Seepat, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Smt. Prabha Khare W/o Jainarayan Khare Aged About 30 Years R/o Khare Mohalla, Nagoi, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Police of Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Bishnu Muni, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.04.2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 46/2024 registered at Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.04.09 16:24:51 +0530 2 (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323, 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. According to the prosecution's account, complainant Shivnarayan Khare filed a report at the Sarkanda police station. He stated that on 06.01.2024, at around 9:00 a.m., a family dispute erupted between his wife, Prabha Khare, and her brothers over cooking food. The dispute escalated, and Prabha allegedly assaulted Jainarayan with her hands, fists, legs, and bricks, using abusive language and threatening to commit murder. As a result, Jainarayan sustained injuries to his head, chest, and eyes. Based on Shivnarayan's complaint, the police registered Crime No. 46/2024 under Sections 323, 294, 506, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused. After completing the investigation, the police filed a charge sheet, adding the offense under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code to the existing charges. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that other co-accused person, namely, Vikram Ghosale in MCRC No. 8715 of 2024 vide order dated 20.12.2024 has already been granted regular bail by this Court. Therefore, he submits that the present applicant is also entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 5. 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 in the present case. 3 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case as the other co-accused person, namely, Vikram Ghosale in MCRC No. 8715 of 2024 vide order dated 20.12.2024 has already been granted regular bail by this Court, further, the fact that the charge - sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 8. Let the Applicants – Anil Ghosle and Smt. Prabha Khare, involved in Crime No. 46/2024 registered at Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323, 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through 4 their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail 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. (iv) 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 sufÏcient 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. 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