1 2025:CGHC:35651 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5183 of 2025 1 - Divali Rathiya S/o Shri Ramsigh Rathiya Aged About 43 Years R/o Village - Semipali, Thana - Dharamjaigarh, Distt- Raigarh (C.G.) 2 - Manbodh Rathiya S/o Shri Bipatram Rathiya Aged About 23 Years R/o Village - Semipali, Thana - Dharamjaigarh, Distt- Raigarh (C.G.) --- Applicants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Station House Officer, Police Station - Dharamjaigarh, Distt- Raigarh (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 5242 of 2025 1 - Vikram Rathiya S/o Shri Harinath Rathiya Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Semipali Khadgaon, Thana Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Applicants : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate For Respondent/State For Complainant : : Mr. Amit Verma, Advocate Mr. Sajal Kumar Gupta, Advocate MADHURIMA THAKUR Digitally signed by MADHURIMA THAKUR Date: 2025.07.24 15:30:43 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 23/07/2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 144/2025, registered at Police Station Dharamjaigarh, District- Raigarh (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 105, 3(7), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Section 135(1)(a) of the Electricity Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that the complainant Firsingh Rathiya has given the merg intimation at Police Station Dharamjaigarh with the averment that marriage function was being held in the house of co-accused Vikram Rathiya and Divali Rathiya had connected the electricity supply directly from the electric pole using a damaged wire due to which current was flowing in the pole of the tent which was also not taken care of by the tent-light and sound system managing persons namely Manbodh Rathiya, it is further stated that the deceased came in contact with the iron pole of the tent having current and died due to electrocution, so on the basis of the said report merg enquiry was conducted, offence was registered, applicants and co- accused person were arrested and after completion of investigation chargesheet was filed. 3. It was argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this 3 case. He would further submit that the investigation is complete and chargesheet has already been filed by the investigation agency and they have not collected any substantial and cogent evidence to prove the guilt of the applicants. There is no antecedents of the applicants and they are the only earning member of their respective families, if they are not released on bail their family would come hand to mouth. The applicants are in jail since 22.05.2025. Also, the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicants and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. Therefore, the present applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. Learned counsel for the complainant do not oppose the bail application. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence levelled against the applicants and further the fact that the marriage ceremony was going on in the house of the present applicant and because of the electric decoration, the deceased who was minor and relative of the present applicants died due to electrocution, and the counsel for 4 the complainant raised no objection for grant of bail to the present applicants and the fact that the applicants are in jail since 22.05.2025 without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the applicants. 8. Let the Applicants- Divali Rathiya, Manbodh Rathiya and Vikram Rathiya, involved in Crime No.144/2025, registered at Police Station Dharamjaigarh, District- Raigarh, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 105, 3(7), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Section 135(1)(a) of the Electricity 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:- (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. 5 (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 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. 9. 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