1 2025:CGHC:32710 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5449 of 2025 1 - Namesh Thakur Alias Nemesh Singh Manjhi S/o Bir Singh Manjhi Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Bhalukona, Ps And Tehsil Komakhan, District Mahasamund (C.G.) 2 - Kanak Ram Yadav S/o Late Budhiram Yadav Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Amanpuri, Ps And Tehsil Komakhan, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Chowki Tuhlu, Police Station Komakhan, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Shubhank Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 14.07.2025 1. This is 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. 50/2025 registered at Police Station – Komakhan, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 3(5), 109, 238(a) on BNS. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA 2 2. As per prosecution story in brief is that the father of the applicant has lodged the FIR stating that his son namely Deepak Tandi was assaulted by Lomesh Thakur& Kanak Tahkur on 20.03.2025 and consequently he has been admitted to Soham Hospital. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant is that the charges leveled against them just in order to harass them and applicants have not having any business with the victim. All of a sudden from the nowhere, the FIR was lodged against them. The aggressor in the entire scenario is the victim himself. A 25 year old boy is threatening the accused persons (who are 43 & 63 years old) for dire consequences on the fateful day i.e. on 20.03.2025, as they have objected the nuisance done by him earlier on 18.03.2025. He also submits that the present applicants are in jail since 19.04.2025 and they have no previous criminal antecedents, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the bail application and submits that there is no previous antecedent against the present applicants but looking to the conduct of present applicants. Thus, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions 3 of learned counsel for the parties, nature of dispute and material available in the case diary, looking to the conduct of applicants I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant No.1 Namesh Thakur Alias Namesh Singh is rejected but considering the age of applicant No.2 -Kanak Ram, who is aged about 60 years and he is in jail since 19.04.2025 I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant No.2. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant No.1– Namesh Thakur Alias Namesh Singh Manjhi filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 involved in Crime No. 50/2025 registered at Police Station – Komakhan, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 3(5), 109, 238(a) on BNS is rejected and applicant No.2 -Kanak Ram filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 involved in Crime No. 50/2025 registered at Police Station – Komakhan, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 3(5), 109, 238(a) on BNS is allowed. 8. 8. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant No.2 Kanak Ram on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-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 4 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 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali