1 2025:CGHC:45054 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6709 of 2025 Mohammad Abdul Majid Khan S/o Late Mohammad Abdul Hafeez (Wrongly Mentioned Hakeem In The Charge Sheet) Aged About 37 Years R/o Mowa Purani Basti, Police Station Pandri, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Kurud, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Mohammad Afroz Athar, Advocate appears through V.C. For Respondent-State : Mr. Sanjeev Pandey, Dy.A.G. Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 03/09/2025 1. Applicant has filed this second bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 659/2023 registered at Police Station – Kurud, District – Dhamtari (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 460, 294, 323, 506, 427, 147, 148, 149, 396, 120-B, 302 of I.P.C.. 2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 15.10.2023 at about 5:30 am, about 8-10 persons entered into the house of deceased, assaulted deceased and his wife and ran away. In the incident, due to assault of accused persons, Chandrashekhar Giri Goswami succumbed to injuries and his wife Archana Giri Goswami suffered injuries. Incident was BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: 2025.09.04 10:34:23 +0530 2 reported to concerned police station based upon which Hemendra Giri Goswami and Hem Giri Goswami were arrested. Based upon their memorandum, applicants were also arrested.. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed any offence as alleged. It is also contended that applicant is made accused in the instant crime only on the basis of memorandum statement of co-accused Hemgiri Goswami and Hemendra Giri Goswami. Now the witness to memorandum statement namely Bhanu Pratap Dhimar (P.W.-11) and Rekhram Dhruwa (P.W.-14) have been examined before the trial Court and they have not supported the prosecution case. Similarly placed co- accused persons have been enlarged on bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No.6890 of 2025 vide order dated 01.09.2025 and applicant is also on similar footing. Hence, applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and the submission made by learned counsel for applicant. He submits that apart from the fact that applicant has been named in memorandum statement of co-accused, there is seizure of one wooden stick and Rs.15,000/- from possession of applicant. However, he do not dispute the submission of learned counsel for applicant that applicant is made accused only on the basis of memorandum statement of co-accused Hemgiri Goswami and Hemendra Giri Goswami. 5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents enclosed along with bail application. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for respective parties, 3 documents placed on record along with bail application and covering memo, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (d) 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 4 default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her 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/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE Balram