1 2025:CGHC:22423 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4066 of 2025 1 - Bappa Gangoli, Aged About 58 Years (wrongly mentioned in impugned order as 38 years), S/o Late Ashutosh Gangoli, R/o - Ward No. 6, Satyanand Palli, Police Station - Pakhanjur, District - North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Pakhanjur, District - North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ali Afzaal Mirza, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Sanjeev Pandey, Deputy Government Advocate. SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 29/05/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.04/2024 registered at Police Station – Pakhanjur, District – North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34, 120-B & 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. SMT NIRMALA RAO Digitally signed by SMT NIRMALA RAO 2 2. Case of prosecution is that, on 07.01.2024 at about 08:00 P.M., the applicant along with other co-accused persons has assaulted Aseem Rai and caused his murder. The incident was reported to the concerned police station based upon which, the aforementioned crime was registered and during course of investigation, the applicant was also arrested along with other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the crime. He has not committed any offence as alleged. He submits that there is no connecting piece of evidence available in the charge-sheet to connect the present applicant in the aforementioned crime. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that two other co- accused persons have been enlarged on bail by this Court in MCRC No. 3063 of 2025, vide order dated 9.5.2025. The case of the applicant is also on similar footing. He also contended that the applicant is in jail since 12.01.2024 thereby he has served about more than 1 year 4 months of pre-trial detention. There are 100 enlisted witnesses, out of which, only 10 witnesses have been examined till date. The witnesses examined have not supported the case of prosecution. Trial may take sometime. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the counsel for the applicant and would submit that the applicants also conspirated for committing murder of the deceased. One co-accused namely, Vikas Talukdar has been engaged to shoot the deceased and accordingly, he committed the murder of Aseem Rai by opening fire upon him through a pistol. He submits 3 that there are seven criminal antecedents against the present applicant. Out of which, four are Istagasa, one is of the year 2023 and the other offences were registered under Indian Penal Code, which are of the year 2003 & 2005. He further submits that from possession of the applicant two mobile phones were seized. However, upon asking, he submits that the mobile phones are stated to be of the applicant. He also contended that as per the CDR seized by the police, location of the applicant was near the place of incident, about 04 days prior to the incident, along with the other co-accused persons. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents filed along with the bail application. 6. Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submission of learned counsel for the respective parties, period of pre-trial detention, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application for grant of bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of Trial Court concerned on the conditions that: “(a) 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 4 trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (b) 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. (c) 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. (d) 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 forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Nimmi