1 2025:CGHC:1765 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 193 of 2025 Gautam Yadav S/o Lingraj Yadav Aged About 21 Years Subhash Nagar Near Chopra Palace Durg Tehsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh (Particulars Of The Applicant Is Not Mentioned The Inpugned Order) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through SHO Police Station Padmanabhpur, District Durg (C.G.) (Details Of Police Station Properly Not Mentioned In Impunged Order Sheet Padmanabhpur Has Become Police Station) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.01.2025 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 1389/2022 registered at Police Station Padmanabhpur, District Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323, 397, 147, 148, 149/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. According to the prosecution's story, the present applicant was ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.01.10 20:12:17 +0530 2 granted bail by the 2nd Additional Session Judge, Durg, on March 2, 2023. The case was subsequently transferred to the same court. However, on February 24, 2024, the applicant failed to appear before the Court. As a result, the court cancelled his surety and personal bond, issuing an arrest warrant against him. The Court stated that the applicant's absence had delayed the case for eight months without any valid reason. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the learned trial Court had previously granted bail to the present applicant. However, on February 24, 2024, when the applicant failed to appear in Court, the Court forfeited his personal bond and cancelled his bail bonds. He also submits that on February 24, 2024, the applicant was unaware that he was required to appear before the Court, and thus, he inadvertently failed to appear before the learned trial court. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has already been submitted in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the applicant was previously granted bail, but it was cancelled when he failed to appear before the trial Court on February 24, 3 2024. However, the applicant claims he was unaware of the said date and his absence was unintentional. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Gautam Yadav, involved in Crime No. 1389/2022 registered at Police Station Padmanabhpur, District Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323, 397, 147, 148, 149/34 of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on 4 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 applicant 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 sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce 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 Abhishek