1 2025:CGHC:32031 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4794 of 2025 Ashok Sahu S/o Late Rambharosh Sahu Aged About 55 Years R/o Purana Bazaarpara Surajpur, Police Station and Tehsilv Surajpur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Surajpur, Dist. Surajpur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.07.2025 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. 574/2024 registered at Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 221, 132, 109(1) and Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution, on 13.10.2024, Head Constable Uday Singh of Police Station Surajpur received information from an ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.07.11 18:26:55 +0530 2 informer that one Kuldeep Sahu, a habitual offender, was sitting in his Swift Desire car bearing No. CG-29-AD-5666 in front of the old CSP Office. Then, he and Head Constable Mohd. Talib Sheikh went together to verify the same. It is further alleged that, upon seeing them, with the intention of killing them, accused Kuldeep Sahu tried to drive over them. It is also stated that, at the time of the incident, co-accused Phool Singh @ Rinku Singh, Chandrakant Goldie, Chaudhary @ CK Chaudhary, Aryan Vishwakarma, Raju Sahu, and applicant Ashok Sahu were also sitting in the car. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that even if the entire story of the prosecution is taken at face value, the offences under Sections 221, 132, 118(2), 109(2), and 3(5) of the BNS are not made out, as the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are missing. There is nothing on record to suggest that the applicant participated in the commission of the alleged offences. He submits that at the first instance, the complainant/victim, who is a Police Head Constable, while reporting the alleged incident, did not mention that, apart from Kuldeep Sahu, any other persons were in the car or aided in the commission of the alleged offence. He submits that a bare perusal of the FIR, it is evident that the alleged offence did not involve several persons and that the applicant was never a part of the said incident. No injury has been sustained by anyone. He further submits that the applicant is not named in the present FIR dated 13.10.2024 and was subsequently named for the first time during 3 the investigation in the statement of the complainant/victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS on 14.10.2024. The entire story of the prosecution is falsified by the single fact that, as per the Rojnamcha Sanha, the complainant along with other police officers left the police station in a government vehicle, whereas in the FIR, the complainant states that he was on foot. He submits that no specific role has been attributed to the applicant, and he has been implicated in the instant case solely because he is the father of the main accused. He also submits that neither any recovery is to be effected from the applicant, nor is the applicant in a position to tamper with any evidence. Therefore, keeping the applicant in custody would only subject him to harassment and humiliation. He submits that the present applicant has 10 criminal antecedents under the IPC and Istagasa for which he has already been given explanation in the present bail application. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 17.10.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge- sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court. She submits that looking to the criminal antecedents of the present applicant, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and further the fact that though the present applicant has 10 4 criminal antecedents under the IPC and Istagasa, he has given explanation in the present bail application, further the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court, moreover, the applicant has been in jail since 17.10.2024, looking to the period of detention in jail and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Ashok Sahu, involved in Crime No. 574/2024 registered at Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 221, 132, 109(1) and Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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. (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 his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 5 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of four months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek