1 2025:CGHC:40976 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4915 of 2025 Ashish Upadhyay S/o Nagendra Upadhyay Aged About 24 Years R/o 303, Road No.- 04, Ward - 11, Shanti Nagar, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Supela Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Hemant Kumar Agrawal, Advocate and Mr. Shivam Agrawal, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Swajeet Singh Ubeja, Panel Lawyer For Complainant : Mr. Vipin Tiwari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.08.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 557/2019 registered at Police Station - Supela Bhilai, District- Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 294 (च), 506 (2), 507, 454, and 354 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant submitted a written report at Police Chouki Vaishali Nagar, Police Station RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Supela, District Durg (C.G.), stating that the applicant, who resides in front of her house, had been calling her on her mobile number 6804808884 from his mobile numbers 6232050968 and 9111109998, and using obscene language. On 01.06.2019 at about 3:30 p.m., the applicant called the complainant and asked her to come out of her house. Shortly thereafter, the applicant came near her house, where she saw him. When the complainant’s husband objected, the applicant threw his mobile phone and threatened to kill him. On the basis of the complaint, an FIR was registered under Sections 294, 506, and 507 of the IPC. During investigation, the complainant elaborated upon her earlier statement, and upon completion of the investigation, a final report was filed under Sections 294, 506, 507, 454, and 354 of the IPC. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant had earlier been granted bail by the trial Court, however, subsequently, a bail cancellation application was moved by the complainant before the trial Court on the ground that the applicant was threatening the complainant to enter into a compromise. It is submitted that the said bail cancellation application was allowed, and the applicant was taken into custody thereafter. He further submits that the applicant has faced trial, and during the course of the proceedings, the prosecutrix/victim has turned hostile. It is also submitted that the matter is now fixed for recording the evidence of the Investigating Officer. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 10.04.2025 and the trial is 3 likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the applicant, who resides in front of victim's house, had been calling her on her mobile from his mobile, and using obscene language. The applicant called the complainant and asked her to come out of her house, thereafter, the applicant came near her house, where she saw him. When the complainant’s husband objected, the applicant threw his mobile phone and threatened to kill him, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the nature of the incident that the trial is already in progress, the prosecutrix/victim has turned hostile, and the matter is presently fixed for recording the evidence of the Investigating Officer, which shows that the proceedings are at the final stage, this Court finds that granting bail to the applicant at this stage may cause unnecessary delay in the conclusion of the trial. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Ashish Upadhyay, involved in Crime No. 557/2019 registered at Police Station - 4 Supela Bhilai, District- Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 294 (च), 506 (2), 507, 454, and 354 of the Indian Penal Code, is rejected at this stage. 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 two months from the receipt of certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. 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 Rahul dewangan