1 2025:CGHC:39274 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4622 of 2025 1 - Rahul Banjare S/o Ramnarayan Banjare Aged About 24 Years R/o Khapradih P/s Suhela District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) 2 - Bhanupratap Dhritlahare S/o Mehilal Dhritlahare Aged About 25 Years R/o Khapradih P/s Suhela District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Suhela, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shivang Dubey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06.08.2025 1. This 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. 29/2025 registered at Police Station – Suhela, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) , for the offences punishable under Sections 296, VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.08.07 12:11:01 +0530 2 115(2),351(3),221, 324(6), 132 & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per prosecution, one Dinesh Chandravanshi was posted as constable in Suhela Police Station and he was performing his official duty for nomination and information collection for Panchayat Election. At the time he was assaulted by present Applicants /accused along with other co-accused persons using obscene language and threatening to kill him. One Mohd. Sameer Ansari tried to intervene who was also assaulted due to which they suffered injuries. 3. The present applicants are innocent and have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution, which lacks evidentiary support. The learned court below failed to appreciate the absence of any credible evidence on record. Applicant No.1 (25 years old) and Applicant No.2 (24 years old) are young and the sole breadwinners of their family, and co-accused persons in the same case have already been granted regular bail. Applicant No.2 is suffering from acute pancreatitis and is under ongoing medical treatment (Annexure A/2). Although Applicant No.1 is facing trial in three prior cases and Applicant No.2 in one, both have not been convicted in any case and maintain that they have been falsely implicated, hoping for acquittal. They have been in custody since 07.05.2025, and their continued incarceration would violate their fundamental right to life and liberty. Belonging to a marginalized section of society, and in the absence of any incriminating evidence in the present or previous cases, they seek bail, relying on the settled legal principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception. They are permanent residents of the stated address, 3 willing to furnish sureties, and ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. He further submits that the present applicant assaulted injured resulting in grievous injuries. Therefore, the present applicants are not entitled to be granted regular bail in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and upon perusal of the case diary, it is observed that the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature. The charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and the applicants have been in judicial custody since 13.05.2025. As the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present applicants are entitled to be released on regular bail in the present case. 7. Let the Applicant – Rahul Banjare & Bhanupratap Dhritlahare involved in Crime No. 29/2025 registered at Police Station – Suhela, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) , for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2),351(3),221, 324(6), 132 & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail 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 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav