1 2025:CGHC:29518 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5070 of 2025 • Vijay Das Vaishnav S/o Late Peeladas Vaishnav Aged About 59 Years R/o Kauwadih P.S. Gidhpuri District - Balodabazar- -Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gidhpuri Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Vimlesh Bajpai, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01/07/2025 1. This is second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant arrested in connection with Crime No. 138/2024 registered at Police Station – Gidhpuri, District – Baloda-Bazar (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 109 of the BNS, 2023. 2. As per prosecution story, in brief, is that, the complainant/husband of the injured Smt. Chanda Bai Vaishnav lodged the report on 10.11.2024 with the averment that he has constructed two shops near the shop of brother-in-law Vijay Das/applicant, since 4-5 days complainant has started selling of Gutka pouch, drinking water etc. due to said reason on 10.11.2024 some dispute has been arose between them and applicant caused the injury by sharp edged VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA 2 weapon on hand and head, therefore, the complainant lodged the report on the basis of which the FIR was registered, applicant was arrested and after completing the investigation charge-sheet is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that complainant and applicant are brother-in-law and complainant having business rivalry. He submits that the as per the bare perusal of the order sheet dated 02.05.2025, 02.06.2025, 03.06.2025, 12.06.2025, 13.06.2025 evidence of the witnesses not recorded because of their non-presence whereas bailable warrant issued against the Dr. Aditya Verma from 02.06.2025 and 13.06.2025. He also submits that all in all 11 witnesses have been examined and remaining 05 witnesses are not examined till date. However, out of the remaining witnesses, 02 witnesses are stated to be doctors and they are not appearing despite issuance of summons. The present applicant is in jail since 10.11.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the bail application and submits that applicant has been found to be involved in the commission of the crime in question and the instant bail application filed by the present applicant is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature and gravity of the offence and the material available on record, it is evident that since the first bail 3 application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court and after dismissal of the said application, there is no change in circumstances and he remained in jail since 10.01.2025, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, this second bail application of applicant – Vijay Das Vaishanv involved in Crime No. 138/2024 registered at Police Station – Gidhpuri, District – Baloda-Bazar (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 109 of the BNS, 2023, is rejected at this stage. 8. The Chief Medical and Health Officer, Balodabazar is directed to ensure appearance of 02 doctors, namely, Dr. Aditya Verma and Dr. Amit Mukerjee before the trial Court for getting their evidence recorded on the next date so fixed for the said purpose, failing which, their salary be stopped. 9. Learned State counsel is directed to serve a copy of this order to the CMHO concerned for information and compliance at the earliest. 10. 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 vaishali