1 2025:CGHC:47493 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6803 of 2025 • Diwakar Singh Paikara S/o Baltu Singh Paikara Aged About 35 Years R/o Janta Market, L.I.G.- 554, Padmanabhpur, Durg, Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Padmanabhpur, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/09/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.92/2025 registered at Police Station- Padamnabhpur, District-Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 308(2), 308(5), 111(2)(b) and 3(5) of BNS,2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant Hanuman Nayak has filed the written complaint stating that his friend in Pushpendra Kumar Patel was in Central Jail, Durg since January, VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.09.17 18:00:23 +0530 2 2025 and he received the call that if he want to protect his friend from assault, then he is required to pay money and thereafter, the complainant deposited the amount of Rs 5,00/- and thereafter, another call was made to him asking for Rs 1 Lakhs and FIR was lodged and in the investigation it was found that the applicant brother namely Sandeep Wasnik is in jail for offence u/s 302 of IPC and on instruction of the co-accused Sandeep Wasnik, he has received online payment of amount ranging from Rs 500, 1000 and thereafter transferred the same to account of other persons as per the instruction of his brother and other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in crime in question. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the allegation levelled against that applicant used to extort money from the family members of prisoners, who are involved in criminal cases and was directed to be deposited some money in accounts of the applicant. He further submits that co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No.3714 of 2025, MCRC No. 6393 of 2025, MCRC No.5191 of 2025 vide order dated 20.08.2025. He is in jail since 11.05.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant on the the ground of parity. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant along with co-accused persons used to extort money from the family members of prisoners, who are involved in criminal cases and was directed to be deposited some money in accounts of the applicant, looking to the conduct of the applicant, he is not entitled for grant of bail in this case. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the present applicant and co- accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No.3714 of 2025, MCRC No.6393 of 2025, MCRC No.5191 of 2025 vide order dated 20.08.2025, applicant is in jail since 11.05.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Let the applicant – Diwakar Singh Paikwar, involved in Crime Crime No.92/2025 registered at Police Station-Padamnabhpur, District- Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 308(2), 308(5), 111(2)(b) and 3(5) of BNS,2023, be released on bail on their 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, 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. 4 (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 for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali