1 2025:CGHC:41246 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4246 of 2025 1 - Yogesh Sahu S/o Shri Dhannu Sahu R/o Village Tulsi, Police Station Kharora, Tahsil Aarang, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Vinod Dhruv S/o Shri Pardesh Dhruv R/o Village Tulsi, Police Station Kharora, Tahsil Aarang, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicants versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Police Station Kharora, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicants : Mr. Aishwarya Diwan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 14/08/2025 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.268/2025 registered at Police Station- Kharora, District-Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 105 of BNS, 2023. 2. As per the case of the prosecution story, in brief, is that during the investigation of Marg (unnatural death) case No.50/2025 at Kharora Police Station, it was found that on April 10, 2025 electrical 2 contractor Mahendra Verma, engineer Sarwanand, Yogesh Sahu, Vinod Dhruv and the driver of tractor number C.G.04/DT/2864 were doing some work on the main road. They knew they had to take safety steps like using stoppers, red flags, or signs to avoid accidents, but they didn’t do so. While working, the tractor driver moved the vehicle forward, even though a rope was tied 4-5 feet above the road, which was dangerous. At that time, a man named Vishal Nayak was riding his motorcycle (number UP.13/BU/5168) and the rope got stuck around his neck. He died on the spot due to the injury. After the incident, the police registered crime No.268/2025 at Kharora police station. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in crime in question and It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant No.1 namely Yogesh Sahu, is a electrical contractor and applicant No.2 namely Vinod Dhruv is a tractor driver, and on the date of incident they were doing their contractual work on the main road but they were not used safety red flags, signs boards to avoid accidents, as a result one Vishal Nayak was riding his motorcycle and the rope got stuck around his neck and he died on the spot. He further submits that it was an accidental death. The applicants are in jail since 04.05.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that applicants have no previous criminal antecedent, looking to the 3 nature and gravity of the offence, they are not entitled for grant of regular 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 allegation levelled against the applicants and further considering the fact that it was an accidental death, said accident was occurred due to negligence in safety, but not intentionally by the the applicant, they are in jail since 04.05.2025, the fact that applicants have no criminal antecedents, the charge- sheet has been filed, further the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the applicants – Yogesh Sahu and Vinod Dhruv involved in Crime No.268/2025 registered at Police Station-Kharora, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 105 of BNS, 2023 be released on bail on their 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 sufficient cause, 4 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 for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali