1 2025:CGHC:18591 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3151 of 2025 Ajeet Sona @ Teema S/o Ramu Sona Aged About 24 Years R/o Sweeper Colony Jalampur Ward Dhamtari P.S. City Kotwali Dhamtari Tahsil And District - Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer Police Station City Kotwali Dhamtari District - Dhamtari (C.G.) ---- Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Bharat Lal Sahu, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24/04/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 59/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the complainant gave information to the concerned police station that the applicant was moving knife at open place and on such information, the police has KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 seized iron edge and has registered the case under Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the alleged crime. He further submits that there is no ingredient of offence punishable under Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act of the prosecution story against the present applicant and the allegation made by the prosecution against the applicant is false and baseless. The applicant has neither moving knife nor committed any aforesaid offences as alleged by the prosecution against him, looking to the material available on record, prima facie case is not made out against the present applicant and in the present case, charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court and the applicant has three previous criminal antecedents which has been explained in the bail application in para No. 4(A) and he is in jail since 11.03.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the present applicant was wielding knife on the street and threatening the by-passers, further from the possession of the applicant a knife was recovered and the applicant has three criminal antecedents under the IPC out of which one case has been disposed of and two cases are still pending as such, he is a habitual offender. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused 3 the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 11.03.2025 and the fact that in the present case, charge- sheet has been filed before the competent Court further the applicant has three criminal antecedent under the IPC out of which one case has already been disposed off and two cases are still pending and no further interrogation is required and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. 7. Let the Applicant-Ajeet Sona @ Teema, involved in Crime No. 59/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 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 4 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 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. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal