1 2025:CGHC:37931 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5984 of 2025 Chhagan Kumar Thakur S/o Sevaram Thakur, Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Kutharel, Police Station Anda, Tehsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Anda, District Durg C.G. ..Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, 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 BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 35/2025 registered at Police Station Anda, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 118(2) of BNS (As per Charge- sheet). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Sonu Das Manikpuri lodged a report before the concerned police station stating therein that on the night of 04.06.2025 at around 08:30 PM, KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 while he was sitting with Rameshwar Nirmalkar, Deepak Sahu, and Pankaj Sahu at Bazaar Chowk, Kuthrel, the applicant-Chhagan Thakur was engaged in a quarrel with another person. When the complainant and others attempted to intervene and pacify the situation, the applicant, in a fit of rage, abused them with filthy and obscene language and said “Who are you to interfere?”, further threatening to kill the complainant. Thereafter, the applicant struck the complainant on the head with a stone, causing bleeding injuries. Based on the complainant’s report, Crime No. 35/2025 was registered at Police Station Anda, District Durg, against the applicant/accused under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2) and 118(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), and the matter was taken up for investigation. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that there is no direct evidence against him to prove that the present applicant’s involvement in the offence and further the material witnesses i.e., the complainant himself has been opined to be in the state of intoxication and he himself have approached the present applicant and abused him. The complainant himself has not disclosed the ingredients of section levelled against the applicant and therefore the present applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. He further submits that as per the MLC, the victim has sustained injuries and further the query report of the doctor opines that the injury is grievous in nature but has no previous enmity with the victim. The prosecution has failed to establish the motive or 3 intention to made cause injury to victim because as per the prosecution story itself the present applicant was quarreling with some third person and the applicant have no previous enmity with the victim further there is no chance of applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses as the charge sheet has been filed by the investigating authorities before the learned trial Court. He also submits that the prosecution version as mentioned in the FIR is completely different from what the victim/ complainant has stated in his 161 statements before the police authorities further, the mother of the present applicant is suffering from the old age ailment and the present applicant is the sole earning member of the family to cater her medical needs as there is no one to look after her and he is in jail since 16.06.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that during investigation, the complainant/victim Monu Das Manikpuri was medically examined, and the report confirmed fractures in the Left Temporal Bone and Left Mastoid Bone. Consequently, Section 118(2) of BNS was added and after completion of the investigation, the charge sheet has been duly filed before the competent Court. 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, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and 4 the fact that at the time of incident, when the complainant was sitting with others, the applicant was engaged in a quarrel with another person and when the complainant tried to intervene and pacify the situation, the applicant responded aggressively and proceeded to abuse him with obscene and vulgar language and further threatened to kill him and subsequently, the applicant assaulted the complainant near the head with a stone, causing bleeding injuries. During the course of investigation, the injured Monu Das Manikpuri undergone medical examination, which revealed fractures in the Left Temporal Bone and Left Mastoid Bone. In light of this, Section 118(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) was added to the case and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, thus this Court if of the opinion that it is not a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly the bail application of the applicant- Chhagan Kumar Thakur, involved in Crime No. 35/2025 registered at Police Station Anda, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 118(2) of BNS (As per Charge- sheet), is rejected. 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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal