Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40667 (CHH)

SURAJ PATEL @ CHHOTU v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/6645/2025 · 2025-09-21

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:48578 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6645 of 2025 1 - Suraj Patel @ Chhotu S/o Pitambar Patel Aged About 30 Years R/o Chakabuda, Thana Banki Mongra, District Korba C.G. 2 - Akshay Kumar Anant S/o Shyamlal Aged About 24 Years R/o Chakabuda, Thana Banki Mongra, District Korba C.G. ... Applicants versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Banki Mongra, District Korba C.G. ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicants : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.09.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.52/2025, registered at Police Station – Banki Mongra, District – Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(5), 296, 324(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that on 18.03.2025, the complainant namely Suraj Kumar Kurre had lodged written report before Police Adhikshak Korba stating that on 14.03.2025 at about 3:00 pm the VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.09.23 11:20:04 +0530 2 present applicants along with other co-accused person entered the house of complainant and committed marpeet and looted money from his house. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there are total four accused persons are involved in crime in question, out of which two accused persons have already been granted bail by the trial Court and there is four criminal antecedents registered against the applicant No.1 in crime No. 205 of 2024, registered at police station Banki Mogra for offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 331(4) of BNS, in crime No.206 of 2024 registered at police station 206 of 2024 registered at police station Banki Mogra for offence under Sections 326(F) of BNS, in crime No.120 of 2021 registered at police station Banki Mogra for offence under Sections 107, 116(3), 151 of Istagasa has been disposed off and in crime No.36 of 2022 registered at police station Banki Mogra for offence under Sections 107, 116(3), 151 of Istagasa, which has been disposed off and applicant No.2 is having two criminal antecedents in crime No.121 of 2024 and crime No.31 of 2024 registered at police station Banki Mogra for offence under Sections 323, 294 read with Section 34 of IPC, both are pending for their consideration. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicants are in jail and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there are four criminal antecedents registered against the applicant No.1 as well as two criminal 3 antecedents registered against the applicant No.2, an all are explained by learned counsel for the applicant in paragraph 4(a) in the bail application, and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case and submits that on the date of incident applicants along with other two accused entered the house of the complainant and committed marpeet and looted money from his house, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that two co-accused persons have already been granted bail by the trial Court vide order dated 08.08.2025 and copy of the said order-sheets annexed with bail application as Annexure-A/3 charge- sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicants are in jail and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicants, Suraj Patel @ Chotu and Akshay Kumar Anant, involved in Crime No.52/2025, registered at Police Station – Banki Mongra, District – Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(5), 296, 324(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), 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, 4 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 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. 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