Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 32645 (CHH)

DASHRATH MANJHI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/5584/2025 · 2025-09-18

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:48325 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5584 of 2025 Dashrath Manjhi S/o Dhaniram Manjhi, Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Bokramudha, Thana And The Bagbehra, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Bagbehra, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) …. Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.09.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants arrested in connection with Crime No. 69/2025 registered at Police Station – Bagbehra, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 281, 125(A), 125(B), 109 and 238(B) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant namely Nurpat Yadav has lodged a report stating that his elder son Hemsagar was working in IBC 24 as journalist and on dated 16.02.2025 hemsagar had gone to be present at a party meeting. At 6 PM RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 Mukuram Netam had stated that hemsagar has met with an accident and the applicant after hitting hemsagar, has deliberately run over his motorcycle and was lying fallen in the middle of the road. The complainant got his son from the road and admitted him in the Chandi Hospital. His son sustained serious injuries and was in come. Upon which the report was lodged against the applicant. Hence, this application. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that one Maikulal Netam is said to have assaulted the injured with Brick and the applicant was ramming his motorcycle on the injured. It is submitted that the applicant is in jail since 15.06.2025, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the bail application and submits that one Maikulal Netam is said to have assaulted the injured with Brick and the applicant was ramming his motorcycle on the injured, due to which the injured had sustained two lacerated wound and some abrasion, and thereafter, he was admitted in hospital for 1 month and 6 days, and he has undergone a surgery also. As such, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 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 and also considering the fact that one Maikulal Netam is said to have assaulted the injured with Brick and the applicant was ramming his 3 motorcycle on the injured, due to which the injured had sustained two lacerated wound and some abrasion, and thereafter, he was admitted in hospital for 1 month and 6 days, and he has undergone a surgery also, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicants on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, this bail application of applicant – Dashrath Manjhi involved in Crime No. 69/2025 registered at Police Station – Bagbehra, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 281, 125(A), 125(B), 109 and 238(B) of the BNS, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. 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 Rajshekhar