1 2025:CGHC:20279 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3424 of 2025 Chhotu @ Ravindra Kumar Prajapati S/o Ramesh Prajapati Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Khadgawankala Jhingapara Chowki Khadgawan P.S. Pratappur Present Address Block Colony Pratappur District - Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Pratappur District - Surajpur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02/05/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 68/2023 registered at Police Station Pratappur District - Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323, 307 of the Indian Penal Code. AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 20.03.2023 at about 5 O'clock in evening the victim Alok Kumar Nayak was standing in front of his house at the same time his neighbor the present applicant came over there and started abusing Alok Kumar Nayak whereupon Alok prevented him to do so and asked him not to abuse, the present applicant assaulted on him with the piece of bricks; whereby he sustained multiple injuries and he was taken to the hospital and on the basis of the said complaint case has been registered against the applicant under aforementioned offence and subsequently, he was arrested. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that the prosecution's case lacks support from medical evidence. Furthermore, material witnesses statements were not recorded by the concerned police during the investigation, despite which a charge sheet was filed, further upon reviewing the evidence collected by the prosecution, it appears that no prima facie case under Section 307 of the IPC is established, and the allegations seem to have been exaggerated by the police. This suggests that the investigation may not have been fair, and the applicant is entitled to bail. He also submits that so far, the prosecution has examined five witnesses before the trial court: P.W.-1 Vijay Nayak, P.W.-2 Alok Nayak, P.W.-3 Sonia, P.W.-4 Manoj, and P.W.-5 Ghuneshwar Kerketta. However, their testimonies do not establish a case of attempted murder. Moreover, these witnesses have deviated from their earlier police statements, 3 rendering their testimonies unreliable. Copies of the deposition sheets of the prosecution witnesses are collectively filed as Annexure A/2. The applicant is in jail since 13.09.2023, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the applicant has assaulted the injured/victim with a piece of brick, which hit him on his head, due to which, the injured received injuries on his parietal region and as per the NCT Report, the same is found to be grievous in nature, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 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, nature and gravity of offence and the injuries sustained by the injured/victim on his head, the injured received injuries on his parietal region and as per the NCT Report, the same is found to be grievous in nature and MLC Report goes to show that there is thin line on Subdural Hematoma Region on the left parietal region of the injured, but considering the period of detention of the applicant in jail i.e. since 13.09.2023 and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, so far as status of trial is concerned, out of 14 prosecution witnesses, the statement of 5 witnesses have been recorded, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is 4 entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant-Chhotu @ Ravindra Kumar Prajapati, involved in Crime No. 68/2023 registered at Police Station Pratappur District - Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323, 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 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 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 5 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil