1 2025:CGHC:39970 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5387 of 2025 Ramjan Ansari S/o Nizamuddin Ansari Aged About 40 Years Occupation Up Sarpanch Takiya Sharif Ranpurkhurd R/o Ranpurkhurd P.S. Ambikapur District- Sarguja (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer P.S. Kotwali Ambikapur District- Sarguja (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Apoorva Tripathi , Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Mr. Harsh Verma, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.08.2025 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.268/2025 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, Ambikapur District - Surguja (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 3(5), 324(2), 191(2), 331(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.08.13 18:30:13 +0530 2 2. As per prosecution story in brief is that on On 18.04.2025, at around 7:00 AM, the accused Ramzan and his associates, making an allegation of theft against the complainant and his family members, forcibly took them out of their house, abused them, and assaulted them with hands, fists, and sticks. A complaint alleging the said incident was made by one Shahid ansari in the police station. Based on this, F.I.R. No. 268/25, under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 3(5) B.N.S.. was registered against applicant/accused Ramzan Ansari and co-accused Atiq, Chhotu, and their others at Ambikapur Police Station. The applicant was taken into custody on 18.04.2025 and was later released on bail execution of personal bonds from the police station. However, it was again alleged by the complainants that, after his release on the basis of personal bonds the applicant along with other co accused stared threatening the complainant and his wife and were subsequently re-arrested U/s 170/126, 135(3) of BNSS and thereafter placed before the Court of S.D.M. on 21.04.2025. After which the applicant along with the other co-accused were again enlarged on bail on the execution of personal bond of Rs 5000/- by order of the SDM. Thereafter, out of the blue the applicant was again arrested on 28.05.2025, in the name and garb of addition of offences U/s 324(2), 191(2), 331(5) during investigation citing the same to be non-bailable offences. It would be of paramount importance to state here that, out of the additionally added charges, only the alleged offence U/s 331(5) ie. lurking house-trespass with the intention to cause harm of the BNS is the Non-bailable offence. Rests of the additional offices are bailable 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicants are innocent person and have been falsely been implicated in the 3 aforesaid case. He submits that the applicant is the Up-Sarpanch of Gram-Ranpurkhurd. A Takia Mazar is situated on government land in the village, managed by the Anjuman Maradiya Committee. A dispute arose because the Anjuman Islahun Muslemin Waqf Committee, Ambikapur, desired to operate the Mazar. Following a Gram Panchayat meeting, the management was entrusted to the Anjuman Maradiya Committee, leading to the current dispute. He also submits the FIR has been lodged by habitual offenders including Shahid Ansari, who is himself facing multiple trials in thefts related cases and has ben arrested on numerous occasions in the past. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 28.05.2025, 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, the learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the objector 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 applicant is 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, as per the case diary, the injuries received by the injured are simple in nature. Moreover, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, the applicant is in jail since 28.05.2025, the conclusion of the 4 trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Ramjan Ansari, involved in Crime No.268/2025 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, Ambikapur District - Surguja (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 3(5), 324(2), 191(2), 331(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 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 applicant 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 5 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 sufficient 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. 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