1 2025:CGHC:31291 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5245 of 2025 Shankar Rai, Aged About 34 Years, S/o Late Sunil Rai R/o Vill.- Sanjaynagar, Latori, P.S.- Jaynagar, Distt.- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer (S.H.O.) Police Station - Jainagar, Distt.- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Ashutosh Biswas, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Bharat Gulbani, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08/07/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.22/2025 registered at Police Station Jainagar, Dist: Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.07.09 18:36:31 +0530 2 Sections 296,115(2),351(3),109(1),3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a complaint was made by one Rahul Rai that on 12.01.2025 the applicant and co-accused (his uncle and aunt) came and uprooted the plants in the backyard of his house. After knowing about this the father of complainant shouted and due to which the applicant and co- accused came out of their house and started abusing his father and threatened to kill him, where there was a hustle between the family for the partition. It is further alleged that the applicant and co-accused took a wooden log and hit him on his head. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there are cross reports of the incident and the wife of the applicant too has received injuries and she is a co-accused in the present case, she has approached before this Court for grant of anticipatory bail in the present case and the same was rejected by this Court in MCRCA No.271/2025 on 24/02/2025, against which, the wife preferred SLP before the Apex Court and by order dated 1/04/2025 it was directed that no coercive action shall be taken against the wife. It is stated that the injured who is said to have received injuries though was stated to be grievous but no internal damage has been caused. He would submit that the applicant is in jail since 26/03/2025, charge sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application. He would submit that charge sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent court. He would submit that the applicant has three criminal antecedents which has been explained in para 4(A) of the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the fact that there are cross reports of the incident and the wife of the applicant too has received injuries and she is a co-accused in the present case, she has approached before this Court for grant of anticipatory bail in the present case and the same was rejected by this Court in MCRCA No.271/2025 on 24/02/2025, against which, the wife preferred SLP before the Apex Court and by order dated 1/04/2025 it was directed that no coercive action shall be taken against the wife, considering the period of detention of the applicant since 26/03/2025, charge sheet has been filed and trial is likely to some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant-Shankar Rai, involved in Crime No.22/2025 registered at Police Station Jainagar, Dist: Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296,115(2),351(3),109(1),3(5) 4 of BNS., be released on bail on his 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 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 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 5 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri