1 2025:CGHC:30657 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4392 of 2025 1 - Sunil Kumar Xalxo S/o Jaipal Ram Xalxo Aged About 38 Years Occupation - Agriculturist., R/o Village - Ghodi (B.), Uprapara, P.S. - Baghbahar, District - Jashpur (C.G.) 2 - Roopnarayan Ekka S/o Pyara Ekka Aged About 44 Years Occupation -Agriculturist, R/o Village - Ghoghar Basen (Mariyam Toli), P.S. - Kansabel, District - Jashpur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Patthalgaon, District - Jashpur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicants : Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 04/07/2025 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 91/2025 registered at Police Station- Patthalgaon, District- Jashpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 121(1), KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 132, 221 and 223 of B.N.S. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 29.04.2025, complainant Krihnamurthy Diwan, Tehsildar made a written complaint alleging that in pursuance of the directions issued by the Collector, Jashpur, railway survey work was being done at village Trishoth by the Railway officials and revenue officials including complainant, at that time, the applicant and other villagers came there and started obstructing the railway survey and the applicants grabbed his coller and manhandled him and thereby committed the aforesaid offences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in a cock and bull story and are innocent persons and the essential ingredients of alleged offences are perfectly missing in the instant case. He further submits that the concerned Tahsildar and the Revenue Officials were forcibly entering the house of the villagers therefore these villagers raised objection to it; which annoyed the officials and ultimately resulted into lodging of FIR and before carrying out survey, no prior notice were given to the local rustic villagers and the officials behaved arrogantly stating that if their orders are not followed they will lodged FIR. He further submits that no injuries have been inflicted upon the government officials and the entire FIR has been lodged to curb the lawful demands of the villagers in its entirety and further in the present case, five co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in MCRCA No. 887 of 2025, vide order dated 20.06.2025 and the applicants are in jail since 30.04.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some 3 time, therefore he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that when the revenue officials visited the village for survey then the applicants along with other persons assaulted them and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. Accordingly, the present applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicants since 30.04.2025 and further the fact that in the present case, five co- accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in MCRCA No. 887 of 2025, vide order dated 20.06.2025 and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time thus, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicants. 7. 7. Let the applicants – Sunil Kumar Xalxo and Roopnarayan Ekka, involved in Crime No. 91/2025 registered at Police Station- Patthalgaon, District- Jashpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 121(1), 132, 221 and 223 of B.N.S, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each, in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their 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 them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are deliberated or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse 5 of liberty of bail and proceed against them 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. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal