Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41557 (CHH)

ANAND YADAV v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/7016/2025 · 2025-09-02

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:45001 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7016 of 2025 1. Anand Yadav S/o Mohan Yadav Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Kundru PS Sanawal Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 2. Madan Mohan Yadav S/o Shri Ramkesh Yadav Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Kundru Ps Sanawal Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 3. Shyamnarayan Yadav S/o Shri Ramkesh Yadav Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Kundru Ps Sanawal Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- SHO Sanawal, Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. … Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Mr. Sachin Nidhi, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.09.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 39/2025 registered ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.09.04 12:13:31 +0530 2 at Police Station Sanawal, District Balrampur-Ramanujganuj (C.G.) offence under Sections 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 296, 351(2), 115(2), 109(1),117(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution, a report was lodged by the complainant, Shyam Sundar Yadav, at Police Station Sanawal to the effect that his father was in possession of two acres of government land in Village Kunduru, Auradammar, which they had been cultivating for the past 18–20 years. On 04.07.2025, they had sown sawa in the said land. On 13.07.2025, when his father Maheshwar, along with Rajesh and Sanjay, went to the field and he himself was ploughing with his tractor, accused Devdutt Yadav, armed with a stick, along with Bhagirathi, Shivbrat, Radheshyam, Madan Mohan, Shyamnarayan, and Anand, came to the spot. They abused him, threatened to kill him, and Devdutt assaulted him with the stick with the intention of causing his death. As a result, he and his brother Rajesh Yadav sustained serious head injuries from the stick, while Maheshwar and his uncle-in-law also suffered grievous injuries. Maheshwar Yadav sustained injuries on his head, hand, left hand, and back, while Sanjay Kumar suffered injuries on his head and back. Rajesh and Maheshwar sustained such serious injuries that they became unconscious. They were thereafter treated at Sanjeevani Hospital, Ramanujganj. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the complainant, the police registered the aforesaid offences against the applicants. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the complainant party are the aggressors. They themselves initiated the commission of the offence by forcefully entering into the field of the applicants and attempting to plough their land with a tractor. When the applicants objected, the complainant party, with common intention, 3 assaulted the applicants. He further submits that the applicants/accused had earlier lodged a report against the complainant party before the SHO, Police Station Sanawal, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, which was registered as Crime No. 38/2025. In the said report, it was mentioned that the applicants reside in Village Kundru, Yadav Para, and their uncle owns 1.5 acres of land at Kandkariya, Khasra No. 95, which has been under cultivation by their family since the time of their grandfather. This year also, the said land was ploughed and sawa was sown on 02.07.2025. However, on 13.07.2025 at about 08:30 a.m., Shyam Sundar Yadav, Rajesh Yadav, Sanjay Yadav, Ramnandan Yadav, Gurunarayan Yadav, Ramnarayan Yadav, Adesh Yadav, Vinod Kumar Yadav, Mandeep Yadav, Sundardey Yadav, Banarasi Yadav, Parshu Yadav, Gurunarayan Yadav, Raar Yadav, Lakeman Yadav, Ramjanami Yadav and Vidyavan Yadav of Village Talkebarpur, armed with sticks and rods, came with a tractor and Shyam Sundar Yadav started ploughing the land already sown by the applicants. When Shivbrat Yadav questioned them, all the above persons threatened to kill them and abused them. Thereafter, they assaulted the applicants with sticks and rods, causing injuries as follows: Shivbrat Yadav sustained injuries on his left hand below the elbow, thumb, arm, head, and back, Radheshyam Yadav sustained injuries on his left hand below the elbow, Madan Mohan Yadav sustained injuries on his back, Shyam Narayan Yadav sustained injuries on his right leg, Anand Kumar Yadav sustained injuries on his left arm and back, Bhagirathi Yadav sustained injuries on his back, head, and right-hand finger, Phool Kunwar Yadav sustained injuries on his back and thigh, Halkaniya Yadav sustained injuries on his back and leg, Jitni Yadav sustained injuries from an axe. He further submits that the incident was witnessed by Devchand Yadav, Shivkumar 4 Yadav, Manbodh Yadav, and Gopi Yadav. He also submits that after the applicants had lodged the aforesaid complaint, the complainant party, in retaliation and by way of counterblast, lodged the present false report against the applicants in relation to the alleged crime in question. He also submits that the present applicants are in jail since 14.07.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. 5. Mr. Sachin Nidhi, learned counsel, appearing for the objector also opposes the bail application of the present applicants. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, wherein a counter FIR has been lodged between the parties and both sides have sustained simple injuries, moreover, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and they are in jail since 14.07.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicants – Anand Yadav, Madan Mohan Yadav and Shyamnarayan Yadav, involved in Crime No. 39/2025 registered at Police Station Sanawal, District Balrampur-Ramanujganuj (C.G.) offence under Sections 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 296, 351(2), 115(2), 109(1),117(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like 5 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 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 misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail 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 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 them in accordance with law. 6 9. 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 Abhishek