1 / 3 2025:CGHC:2334 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 97 of 2025 1 - Anil Sinha @ Babu S/o Darewal Sinha Aged About 23 Years (Wrongly Mentioned As Rewal Singh In Impugned Order), R/o Gogaon Talab Near Dheerpat Temple, Police Station - Gudiyari, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Gudiyari Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Fouzia Mirza, Sr. Adv. Along with Mr. Navin Shukla, Advocate For State : Ms. Sunita Sahu, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 14/01/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Shuraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 23/07/2024 in connection with Crime No. 483/2024 registered at Police Station Gudiyari, District Raipur, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 140 (2), 127 (2), 109, 311, 111, 190, 191 (2) of BNS, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the on account of old enmity on 15/07/2023 the applicant along with other persons locked the ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.01.15 17:27:36 +0530 2 / 3 complainant in the house of one Prince Bagade and with intention to kill him assaulted him by base ball bat brutally and forcefully took him in the vehicle and reached to Mandi Hasaoud thrown out of the vehicle and again assaulted him by way of hand, fist and knife and under the impression that the complainant has died, left him there. Thereafter, the complainant was admitted to the hospital and on the basis of the report of the complainant the FIR was registered and during investigation the applicant was arrested. 3. Learned senior counsel for the applicant would contend that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case and the name of the applicant is not in the FIR. She would next contend that the complainant has only named two persons i.e. Ankush and Prince Bagde, who have made assaults. She would next contend that the injuries are not grievous. She would next contend that the applicant was not even present at the time of incident and he has not been recognized by the complainant. She would lastly contend that the applicant has been implicated only on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co- accused persons and he is in jail since 23/07/2024, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and would submit that the applicant has uploaded video of making assaults to the complainant on the social media and made certain objectionable comments in the video uploaded on the social media, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 / 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents and the case-diary. 6. Perusal of the documents would show that the applicant along with the other persons assaulted the complainant and threw him in the road and furthermore made the video of making assault to the complainant and uploaded the same in the social media, therefore, looking to the seriousness and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu