1 2025:CGHC:46225 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6146 of 2025 1 - Gyaneshwar Bhongre S/o Manikrao Bhongre Aged About 24 Years Permanent Address Village And P.S. Hiwarkhed District Buldhana (M.H.) Present Address Village Chhanta Bhatapara In The House Of Ashish Satnami (On Rent) P.S. Utai District Durg (C.G.) 2 - Shankar Ghate S/o Bhimarao Ghate Aged About 30 Years Permanent Address Village Charthana P.S. Kura District Jalgaon (M.H.), Present Address Village Chhanta Bhatapara In The House Of Ashish Satnami (On Rent) P.S. Utai District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Utai, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant(s) For Applicants : Mr. Praveen Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/09/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 177/2025 registered at Police Station KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Utai, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 105, 3(5) of B.N.S. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the date of the incident, when the deceased was returning home on his two-wheeler, the co- accused abused him, saying, “Don’t you know how to drive properly? You almost killed my child.” Thereafter, all the accused persons assaulted him. When the deceased became unconscious, the accused returned to their homes. The family members of the deceased brought him back to his house. Later, when they tried to feed him, he did not respond, so he was shifted to the hospital, where he was declared dead. Consequently, a criminal case was registered against the accused, the present applicant was arrested, and the charge sheet was filed before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicants, along with two other accused persons, are alleged to be involved in the incident. It is alleged that the deceased, who was in a drunken state, had hit the child of applicant No. 2, due to which a quarrel ensued. During this quarrel, the applicants, along with the wife of applicant No. 2, are said to have assaulted the deceased with hands and fists, whereas another co-accused, namely Pradeep Bhongre, is alleged to have inflicted injuries with a steel rod. He further submits that, as per the post-mortem report of the deceased, the cause of death could not be ascertained and the viscera was preserved for further examination. The viscera report revealed that the deceased had 3 consumed ethyl alcohol measuring 11.3 mg, and no poisonous substance was detected. It is also submitted that after the incident, the deceased went to his house and slept, but later developed certain complications, following which he was taken to the hospital where he unfortunately passed away. It is further argued that the applicants have been in custody since 10.05.2025, and the charge- sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. Considering that the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, it is prayed that the applicants may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicants and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicants have no criminal antecedents. 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 offence levelled against the applicants and further the fact the applicants, along with two other accused persons, are alleged to be involved in the incident. Further, the deceased, who was in a drunken state, had hit the child of applicant No. 2, due to which a quarrel ensued. During this quarrel, the applicants, along with the wife of applicant No. 2, are said to have assaulted the deceased with hands and fists, whereas another co- accused, namely Pradeep Bhongre, is alleged to have inflicted injuries with a steel rod. As per the post-mortem report of the 4 deceased, the cause of death could not be ascertained and the viscera was preserved for further examination. The viscera report revealed that the deceased had consumed ethyl alcohol measuring 11.3 mg, and no poisonous substance was detected. Also considering the fact that after the incident, the deceased went to his house and slept, but later developed certain complications, following which he was taken to the hospital where he unfortunately passed away and the applicants are in custody since 10.05.2025, and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the applicants have no criminal antecedent therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicants -Gyaneshwar Bhongre and Shankar Ghate involved in Crime No. 177/2025 registered at Police Station Utai, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 105, 3(5) of B.N.S., be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court 5 on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their 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 them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are deliberated 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 them in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal