1 2025:CGHC:25070 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4448 of 2025 Anand Ram Bhaina S/o. Late Same Lal Bhaina Aged About 30 Years R/o. Village - Khaparitand, P.S. Mulmula, District - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, P.S. Mulmula, District - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 17.06.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this Second Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS in connection with Crime No. 366/2024, registered at Police Station Mulmula, Jangjgir-Champa, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296,115(2),351(2),324(2) &109 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution's case, in brief is that on 25.11.2024 the complainant VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.06.18 18:28:33 +0530 2 Barsatilal bhaina lodged the F.I.R. complaining that a person Yashwant nayak from locality told him that his brother is lying on the ground near the accused's house. Complainant took him to the hospital. He mentioned in the FIR that an unknown person has abused and fought with his brother. FIR was lodged under crime number 366/2024 injuries were told to be of grave nature in the medical examination and later on the accused was taken into custody during investigation. Victim was admitted in hospital from 25.11.2024 to 04.12.2024 and accused is in jail 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant has been falsely dragged to the offence and he is of no criminal mindset and behavior. He further submits that applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and he also submits that the applicant is in jail since 13.12.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the second bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. From perusal of the case diary, it transpires that due to the assault made by the applicant, victim sustained grievous injuries over his body. Thus, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature and gravity of the offence, it is not a fit case to enlarge the 3 applicant on regular bail. Therefore, the bail application filed by the applicant/accused – Aanandram Bhaina involved in Crime No. 366/2024, registered at Police Station Mulmula, Jangjgir-Champa, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296,115(2),351(2),324(2) &109 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 7. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavor to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of three months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned, is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 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 vaibhav