Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2660 (CHH)

SUSHIL SONI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/229/2025 · 2025-01-10

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:1780 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 229 of 2025 1. Sushil Soni S/o Shri Raju Soni (Sona), Aged About 31 Years, R/o Ward No. 25 Sweeper Colony, House No. 42, Behind D.M.S. College Mahasamund, Police Station, Tehsil and District Mahasamund (C.G.) 2. Manoj Kumar S/o Mahesh Kumar Aged About 43 Years R/o Ward No. 25 Sweeper Colony, Behind D.M.S. College Mahasamund, Police Station, Tehsil and District Mahasamund (C.G.) … Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station- Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund(C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Advocate General. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/01/2025 1 The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.01.11 13:59:46 +0530 2 with Crime No. 566/2024, registered at Police Station – Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 324(4), 331(4) and 191 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2 The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 28.111.2024 at around 1:30 O’clock both the present applicants with other 15-20 persons having club, sword, rod to destroy the property of the complainant started banging the doors of the house of the applicant and entered the house. On the basis of statement of the complainant the Police has registered offence under Section 296, 351(2), 324(4), 331(4), 191(2) of BNS and has arrested both the present applicants. 3 It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that a cross report of the incident which was filed from the side of the applicant against the husband of the complainant which was registered as Crime No. 564/2024 has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.12.2024 passed in MCRC No. 8876/2024, further the applicant No. 1 has 08 previous criminal antecedents, in all cases he has been acquitted and applicant No. 2 has 08 previous criminal antecedents, out of which 05 cases are under the IPC, two cases are under the Excise Act and one case is under the MVA, in all cases he has been acquitted, further the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicants are in jail since 05.12.2024 and trial is 3 likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4 On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submitted that the present applicants with other 15-20 persons having club, sword, rod to destroy the property of the complainant started banging the doors of the house of the applicant and entered the house, therefore they are not entitled to be released on bail. 5 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6 Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that a cross report of the incident which was lodged from the side of the applicant against the husband of the complainant which was registered as Crime No. 564/2024 has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.12.2024 passed in MCRC No. 8876/2024, further the applicant No. 1 has 08 previous criminal antecedents under the IPC, in all cases he has been acquitted and applicant No. 2 has 08 previous criminal antecedents, out of which 05 cases are under the IPC, two cases are under the Excise Act and one case is under the MVA, in all cases he has been acquitted, further the charge-sheet has been filed and they are in jail since 05.12.2024 and conclusion of the 4 trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7 Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 - Sushil Soni and Manoj Kumar, involved in Crime No. 566/2024, registered at Police Station – Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 324(4), 331(4) and 191 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (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 5 bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants 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 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 them 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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti