1 2025:CGHC:42179 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5582 of 2025 Akash @ Akku Chakradhari S/o Late Premlal Chakradhari Aged About 20 Years R/o Behind G.R.D. School Ward No. 39, Kodhi Mohalla Diparapara, Durg Police Station And District - Durg (C.G.) (Description Of The Applicant Mentioned As Per Charge Sheet) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Office, Police Of Police Station Durg District - Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shubham Dewangan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20.08.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 658/2024, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali District - Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2)(3), 115(2), 109 & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25(1-B) & 27 of the Arms Act. 2. As per the prosecution story in brief is that, the complainant namely VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.08.21 11:53:17 +0530 2 Gokul Nishad made complaint to the police Station Durg stating therein that On 27-01-2024 at about 8.30 PM in the night he received the phone call of his brother and his brother stated that his friend namely Akku, Gogo, Klesh, Partre and other have near the Hanuman Mandir they have abuses him in filthy languages and also assaulted him on stomach, Bak Side and other part of body and therefore the blood was flouted from the part of his body. On receiving of said phone, the complainant immediately reached on the spot and taken to the hospital. 3. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, as he has been made an accused merely on suspicion without committing any offence or participating in any act constituting the alleged offences. The evidence collected by the prosecution is not prima facie sufficient to hold him guilty, as there is no eyewitness in the matter, no motive has been established, and the FIR was lodged belatedly without proper explanation. The applicant has been in custody since 29.12.2024, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. He is a labourer and the sole source of livelihood for his family. Being a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with witnesses. The applicant is ready to furnish adequate surety, abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been 3 submitted before the competent Court in the present case. She further submits that the present applicant assaulted the injured due to which he suffered severe injury, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and further taking into account that a co- accused has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 5316 of 2025 vide order dated 09.07.2025, that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court and the applicant has been in jail since 29.12.2024, and that the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the applicant – Akash @ Akku Chakradhari, involved in Crime No. 658/2024, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali District - Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2)(3), 115(2), 109 & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25(1-B) & 27 of the Arms Act, 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 4 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 his 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 his, 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 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav