1 2025:CGHC:45984 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7159 of 2025 Yogendra Vimal Kumar Dewangan @ Munna S/o Shri Sukhuram Dewangan Aged About 53 Years R/o Village- Katgi, Police Station - Kasdol, Distt.- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station - Kasdol, Distt.- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant/State(s) : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.09.2025 1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 222/2025 registered at Police Station Kasdol, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 333, 108, 190, 191(2), of BNS 2023 (As per charge memo). 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant has already been KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 4682/2025, vide order dated 20.06.2025, on merits. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief is that the complainant, Kusum Sahu, lodged a complaint at Police Station Kasdol on 31.03.2025, alleging, inter alia, that at around 3:00 PM, she, her sisters-in-law (Devrani Rameshwar Sahu and Nanad Tuleshwari Sahu), and her father-in-law were present at their house. It is alleged that the present applicant, Yogendra Vimal Dewangan, along with Pankaj Dewangan and their associates from Village Katgi, forcibly entered their house. They confronted her father-in-law, Chandrika Prasad Sahu, accusing him of encroaching upon grassland and preventing them from storing sand on the said land. In a fit of anger, the accused persons hurled abusive and obscene language and threatened to kill him thereafter, assaulted him with fists and hands. Due to the assault, obscene abuse and harassment by the accused persons, Chandrika Prasad Sahu, suffering from physical and mental distress, consumed a poisonous substance in an attempt to commit suicide. Thereafter, he and his companions then fled away. After that Chandrika Prasad Sahu was taken to the Government Hospital, Kasdol, for treatment however, he succumbed during the course of treatment. Based on the complainant’s report, Merg Intimation No. 20/2025 was registered under Section 194 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and the body was sent for post-mortem examination. Thereafter statements of the complainant and other 3 witnesses were recorded in connection with the incident. The post- mortem report, prepared by Dr. Govardhan Sen, confirmed that the cause of death was consumption of poison in a suicide attempt. Memorandum statements of the accused were recorded in the presence of independent witnesses. The accused Yogendra Vimal Kumar Dewangan, Firu Yadav, Pankaj Devangan, and Ramavtar Verma were arrested and upon completion of the investigation, charge sheet has filed before the competent Court. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant’s earlier bail application was rejected on merits, and the fresh ground for filing the second bail application is that, after the rejection of the first bail application, three co-accused were granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 6211/2025, vide order dated 07.08.2025, and in MCRC No. 6753/2025, vide order dated 28.08.2025. It is contended that the case of the applicant is similar to that of the co-accused who have been granted bail. The applicant has been in custody since 01.04.2025 and, as the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the applicant, along with his associates, forcibly entered the house of the complainant, abused him using filthy and obscene language and physically assaulted him with hands and fists. They also threatened to kill him. As a result of the physical assault, mental harassment, and obscene abuse inflicted by the applicant and his associates, the complainant, 4 unable to bear the trauma, consumed a poisonous substance in an attempt to commit suicide. He was thereafter taken to the Government Hospital, Kasdol, for treatment; however, he died during the course of treatment. As per the post-mortem report of the deceased, Chandrika Prasad Sahu, prepared by Dr. Govardhan Sen, it was confirmed that the cause of death was the consumption of poison, consistent with suicide and also considering the fact that the earlier bail application of the applicant has already been rejected on merits. Accordingly, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant’s earlier bail application was rejected on merits and the fresh ground for filing the second bail application is that, after the rejection of the first bail application, three co-accused were granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 6211/2025, vide order dated 07.08.2025, and in MCRC No. 6753/2025, vide order dated 28.08.2025 and it appears that the case of the applicant is similar to that of the co-accused who have been granted bail and he has been in custody since 01.04.2025, charge-sheet has already been filed and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence I am inclined to allow this bail application. 8. Let the applicant, Yogendra Vimal Kumar Dewangan, involved in 5 Crime No. 222/2025 registered at Police Station Kasdol, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 333, 108, 190, 191(2), of BNS 2023 (As per charge memo), 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 them 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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 6 (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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal