1 2025:CGHC:38112 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6062 of 2025 • Arun Das Minj S/o Late Sukhdeo Das Minj, Aged About 43 Years R/o Keshav Nagar Vishrampur P.S. Vishrampur District Surapur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Police Station Incharge Bango District Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Suresh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Soumya Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01/08/2025 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. 14/2024 registered at Police Station- Bango, District Korba (C.G.) under Sections 507, 509, 506, 509(B) of IPC. 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, is that on the basis of the written report made by the prosecutrix stating that the applicant via Face-book sent his number to the prosecutrix and thereby subjected her to talk with him, otherwise he will take her Number from S.P. or TI concerned and thereby she became afraid and provided her number to the applicant and thereafter the applicant told to her VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.08.05 10:45:37 +0530 2 about himself that he was DSP and was also Ex-Army officer and at that time he was the head of the Electronic media and thereby stated to the prosecutrix that she is Bardi bearing Sherni and also stated that he was Orphan as he had no other relative and thereby offered her to come in relationships with him, then prosecutrix replied in the terms that, since she was involved in her domestic land disputes and thereby denied to get performed her marriage until and unless her case would not be decided, upon which the applicant said that let she give love and the physical affection to him and rest all upon him, he shall looked after all the things, as he stated to work as High Court Advocate and thereby he get decided the case, but she had talked with him only one day and thereafter got not attending his calls, then on dtd. 03.01.2024 the Applicant at evening hours used to call the prosecutrix and started to abused abruptly using filthy languages by stating that his call were always been accepted by SP & Collector, then under which capacity she used to cut his call and thereby also started to abused her in the name of her mother and sister and also threaten to kill her life and also inquired about her cloth of the her internal part by asking about the size of her Bra and finger and also stated that she used to call in vedio in her nude position and showing her private sensitive parts by obscene manner and also asking as to whether she did used to shave her private hairs or not and thereafter the prosecutrix used to blocked his mobile Number, then by the means of whatsaap, applicant started to sent obscene messages and posts and further also threatened to involved her in another cases and started to get annoyed to her and resultantly she would become harassed mentally and came in the position to get commit 3 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in crime in question. He further submits that the complainant is a police constable and was in contact with applicant via facebook. He further submits that in the written report made by complainant, in which she stated that applicant threatened to the complainant with averment that he will take her number from S.P. or TI concerned, thereby she became afraid and provided her number to him. Applicant introduced himself that he was DSP, Ex- Army officer and Advocate in High Court and at that time he was the head of the Electronic Media. Applicant intimidated the complainant for sexual purposes. He also submits that charges levelled against the applicant on 18.09.2024, thereafter, case was listed for prosecution’s evidence on 26.09.2024, despite that complainant did not appear before the trial Court for the same, so far as, he is in jail since 29.05.2024. Further applicant has eight criminal antecedents, out of which, in three cases applicant was acquitted of charges. The conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, she prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case before the competent Court and also endorse the said submission that the applicant has eight criminal antecedents registered at P.S. Vishrapur District- Surajpur, P.S. Chachai District- Anuppur (M.P.) and P.S. Gumla (Jharkhand) respectively as Crime No. 171/2010 offence U/s 452,354,506 IPC, in Crime No. 07/2013 offence U/S 294,506,395 IPC and 3(1-5) ST/SC Act, in Crime No. 72/2013 U/s 186,353,354 IPC, in Crime No. 181/2013 U/s 294,506(B), 284, 389 IPC, Crime No. 4 66/2022 Us 452,354, 506IPC, Iestgasa No. 245/2021 U/s 107,116 Cr.P.C., Crime No. 72/2013, Us 498 -A IPC & Crime No. 318/2022 Us 376 (2) (n), 147,420,467,468,471,189,509,120-B IPC., but in the same respect had not taken in the reliance that, the Crime No. 07/2013 U/S 294,506,395 IPC and 3(1-5) ST/SC Act, which had been registered as Special Session Trial No. 43/2013, in which the Applicant had been acquitted by the all allegation vide judgment dtd. 07.05.2014 by Special Judge (ST-SC Act) Surajpur, but, looking to the conduct of the applicant, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 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 that the present applicant has eight criminal antecedents, out of which, in three cases applicant was acquitted of charges, particularly considering the fact that the complainant did not appear before the trial Court for recording her evidence, and he is in jail since 29.05.2024 and charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take 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. 7. Let the Applicant – Arun Minj involved in Crime No. 14/2024 registered at Police Station- Bango, District Korba (C.G.) under Sections 507, 509, 506, 509(B) of IPC., be released on bail on their furnishing 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. 5 (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. 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order in accordance with law. 9. The Superintendent of Police, Korba (C.G.) is directed to ensure the presence of the complainant as well as other witnesses of charge- sheet before the trial Court for early disposal of the case. 10. The Registrar (Judicial) is also directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court as well as Superintendent of Police, Korba (C.G.). 11. 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 vaishali