1 2025:CGHC:45406 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7061 of 2025 Ganeshwar Kamar S/o Puneu, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Beloura-Para, Police Station Magarlod, District Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Magarlod, District Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 04/09/2025 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. 72/2025 registered at Police Station Magarlod, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the incident took place on 11.05.2025 at around 8:30 PM. The complainant, Anil Kumar AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Kamar, reported that the applicant and his wife Sokarobai, who are his neighbors, were having an argument in front of his house. When the complainant attempted to intervene and calm the situation, the applicant allegedly became aggressive, questioned his interference, and verbally abused him. It is further alleged that the applicant went into his house, returned with three bows, and threatened the complainant, stating that he would not spare him. The applicant is said to have loaded an arrow and aimed it at the complainant’s chest with the intent to cause harm. The complainant claims he blocked the arrow with his left hand, resulting in injury. Based on this report, the Station House Officer of Police Station Magarlod, District Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh), registered an FIR under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the applicant was arrested during the investigation. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated and arrested without proper investigation or concrete evidence, merely on suspicion. The FIR was lodged with delay, and no satisfactory reason for such delay has been provided by the police. The medical report indicates only a simple injury, with no involvement of any vital part or any clear medical opinion suggesting danger to life, making the prosecution's medical evidence doubtful. Even if the prosecution story is accepted at face value, no offence under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is made out, as there is no specific allegation that the applicant assaulted the victim. The arrest appears to be based solely on a memorandum statement without independent 3 corroboration. The investigation has already been completed and the charge sheet has been filed. The applicant has been in custody since 14.05.2025, and further detention will serve no useful purpose. Hence, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant is alleged to have involved in a verbal dispute with his wife outside the complainant’s residence. When the complainant attempted to intervene, the applicant reportedly became aggressive, used abusive language, and later returned with a bow and arrow. It is further alleged that the applicant threatened the complainant and discharged an arrow aimed at his chest. The complainant states that he blocked the arrow with his hand, resulting in an injury, therefore, applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 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, period of detention of the applicant since 14.05.2025, the fact that though the the applicant is alleged to have involved in a verbal dispute with his wife outside the complainant’s residence, when the complainant attempted to intervene, the applicant reportedly became aggressive, used abusive language, and later returned with a bow and arrow, further the applicant threatened the complainant and discharged an arrow aimed at his chest, which the complainant states that he blocked 4 the arrow with his hand, resulting in an injury, but as per MLC Report it has not been mentioned that the injury was grievous in nature and dangerous to life, also considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Ganeshwar Kamar, involved in Crime No. 72/2025 registered at Police Station Magarlod, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 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, 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 5 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil