1 2025:CGHC:33450 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4680 of 2025 Mohd. Jameel @ Putwa S/o. Mohammad Nasruddin Mansuri Aged About 26 Years R/o. Near Jalaram Temple, Shahid Nagar, P.S.- Khamtarai, District - Raipur ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Khamtarai, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anway Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16.07.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 20/2025 registered at Police Station : Khamtarai, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 109, 118(1), 190, 191(2), 192(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.07.17 11:14:41 +0530 2 2. The prosecution's case, in brief, is that as the complainant lodged a complaint stating that while he was at his home around 10:00 pm, he received a call from his elder brother, Durgesh Sahu, informing him that Gulzar was quarrelling with him and asking him to come quickly. Thereafter, he went to Jalaram Temple and saw that the applicant, along with other co-accused, was beating Durgesh Sahu. They abused him and threatened to kill him and his elder brother, Durgesh Sahu, and assaulted them with hands and fists. It is further alleged that Gulzar and Putwa beat him with a sharp object, due to which he suffered injuries on his left leg, shoulder, and head caused by the applicant and other co-accused. Accordingly, the FIR was lodged under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 109, 118(1), 190, 191(2), 192(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that it is only alleged that there was a sudden scuffle between the complainant and the applicant, with no intention or preparation, and no weapons were used, as only hand and fist blows are alleged against the present applicant. He further submits that an FIR was first registered against the complainant, Ghanshyam Sahu, and his brother, Durgesh Sahu, bearing FIR No.17/2025. He submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 15.01.2025, conclusion of the trial may take sometime, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel State counsel opposes the bail 3 application of the present applicants and submits that the charge- sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of offence and further the fact that there is cross reports of the incidents and both sides have received injuries, further the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case, the applicant is in jail since 15.01.2025, the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant - Mohd. Jameel @ Putwa, involved in Crime No. 20/2025 registered at Police Station : Khamtarai, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 109, 118(1), 190, 191(2), 192(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing 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. 4 (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 sufficient 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 of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient 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 and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek