1 2025:CGHC:35542 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4973 of 2025 1 - Sunil Urf Siddu Yadav S/o Radheshyam Yadav Aged About 27 Years R/o Shyam Lal Pandey Street No. 01, Ganjpara, Ward No. 37, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Sho, Police Station Durg District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Aman Tamrakar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23/07/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 470/2024, registered at Police Station Durg, District- Durg (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 109, 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act. MADHURIMA THAKUR Digitally signed by MADHURIMA THAKUR Date: 2025.07.24 15:35:40 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story in brief is that the complainant Gopi Ram Sahu has lodged a report in Police Station Durg Kotwali that on 16.09.2024 at around 11 pm after Ganesh Puja havan, everyone was standing near the pandal, then two boys namely Sunil and another who is juvenile namely Shubham alias Shyam, both came and on 15.09.2024 they quarrelled with Omprakash Verma and made a fatal attack on the left side of the neck of Laxmikant Sahu with a sharp iron buttoned knife. The other juvenile accused injured the elbow of the left hand and back of the injured with a sharp knife, due to which an FIR was registered against the accused persons in the Police Station Durg, District- Durg and the applicant and other co-accused juvenile was arrested on 16.09.2024 in Crime No. 470/2024. 3. It was argued by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. No weapon is recovered rom possession of present applicant. The only allegation against the present applicant is that he has assaulted the elbow of the hand and the injury sustained by assault of present applicant is simple in nature. As per the memorandum of complainant and the injured person the main allegation is against the other co-accused person who has assaulted with the knife. He would further submit that the trial is in progress and material witnesses has not been examined before the learned court below and the trial will take long time for its final conclusion. The applicant is in jail since 16.09.2024, he therefore prays for grant of 3 regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the injured sustained lacerated wound on left arm which is 10 cm x 5 cm x 8 cm deep and stab wound on left upper back/shoulder which is 1 cm x 0.5 cm x 2 cm, therefore the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 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, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant, particularly the fact that as per the memorandum of complainant and the injured person the main allegation is against the other co- accused person who has assaulted with the knife, the applicant is in jail since 16.09.2024 and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application deserve to be and is hereby allowed. 7. Let the Applicant- Sunil alias Siddu Yadav, involved in Crime No. 470/2024, registered at Police Station Durg, District- Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 109, 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS, is issued and the applicant 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 Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (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 BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the 5 applicants 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 copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Madhurima