1 2025:CGHC:22821 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3118 of 2025 1. Nagendra Shashwat S/o Ramprashad Shashwat, aged about 35 years R/o Village Tendumudi, PS-Dabhra, District Sakti (CG) ... Applicant (In Jail) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Dabhra, District Sakti Chhattisgarh --- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ravi Maheshwari, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. K.P. Gupta, Govt. Advocate SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board 10.06.2025 1. This is second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (henceforth ‘the BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to applicant, who is in custody in connection with Crime No.48/2024 registered at Police Station Dabhra, Sakti (CG) for the offence punishable under 2 Sections 294, 506, 436 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25, 27 of the Arms act. 2. First bail application of applicant bearing M.Cr.C. No.2108/2024 was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 10.4.2024 with liberty to repeat the prayer at appropriate stage. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged report in concerned police station stating that on 14.2.2024 at 11:50 applicant came to his shop, brandishing a sword, he abused him filthily; threatened him for life, sprinkled petrol, which he was carrying in a jar, in his shop as also in the shop of his neighbourer and set his shop on fire and thereby caused loss of property amounting to Rs.75,000/-. Based on said complaint, instant crime is registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 3.4.2022. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. Allegations levelled against applicant are absolutely false and baseless. Referring to deposition sheet of Pappu Kumar (PW-2), neighbouring shop keeper of complainant, which is placed on record as Annexure A-1, he submits that he has entered into compromise with the applicant without any fear or coercion and he does not want to prosecute the case anymore against the applicant. Applicant has no criminal antecedent, he is in 3 custody since 14.2.2024; charge sheet has already been, custodial interrogation of applicant is not required now and conclusion of trial is likely to take time, therefore, he prays that applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes bail application by submitting that the complainant has made specific allegation against the applicant regarding his involvement in commission of crime in question. However, he does not dispute submission of learned counsel for applicant that neighbouring shop-keeper of complainant has entered into compromise with applicant in view of the document enclosed with bail application. 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, nature of allegations against applicant; submissions of learned counsel for respective parties; period of pre-trial detention of applicant and the fact that there is no criminal antecedent against applicant, without commenting anything on merit, I am inclined to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, this second bail of application is allowed and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one 4 surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned on the conditions that; • he shall appear before the trial Court concerned regularly on each & every date unless exempted from appearance. • he shall not, in any manner, tamper with prosecution witnesses. • If he is found involved in similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge roshan/- SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Digitally signed by SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI