1 2025:CGHC:46401 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7188 of 2025 Arun Mishra S/o Rajnarayan Mishra, Aged About 63 Years R/o T.V. Tower, Chhote Atarmuda, Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Chakradhar Nagar, District – Raigarh (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shukla, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate. For Objector : Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.09.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 232/2025, registered at Police Station – Chakradhar Nagar, District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 333, 75(1)(i), 75(1)(ii), 75(1)(iv), 308(2) and 108 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the present applicant obtained the signatures of the victim and her husband, Rupnarayan, on 23 plain RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 stamp papers and also took a blank cheque from them. On 30.05.2025, present applicant demanded money from the victim and threatened her by saying, give me his money, or have physical relations with him. It is further alleged that present applicant also took possession of the victim's house, compelling the victim and her family members to shift to the house of her brother-in-law, Parmanand. On 31.05.2025, the other co-accused person and Nitin Mishra allegedly abused the victim and her family members in front of Parmanand's house. Thereafter, the victim's husband, being mentally harassed, went near his own house, where present applicant family members, namely Santosh Mishra, Nitin Mishra, and others, abused him, refused to vacate the house, and told him, do whatever he want, just die. Driven by such harassment, the victim's husband, Rupnarayan Diwan, consumed poison, which led to his death. Accordingly, the crime was registered, and after due investigation, the charge sheet was filed. Hence, this application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant. It is further submitted that there is no any suicide note and earlier the deceased has tried to commit suicide many times, and the co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 14.08.2025 and 28.08.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 6460/2025 and 6751/2025. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 31.05.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the Objector opposes the bail application and submits that the 3 charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that due to the ill-treatment and mentally harassment done by the applicant along with the co-accused persons, the husband of the complainant, Rupnarayan Diwan, committed suicide by consuming poison, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there is no any suicide note and earlier the deceased has tried to commit suicide many times, and the co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 14.08.2025 and 28.08.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 6460/2025 and 6751/2025, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 31.05.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Arun Mishra, involved in Crime No. 232/2025, registered at Police Station – Chakradhar Nagar, District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 333, 75(1)(i), 75(1)(ii), 75(1)(iv), 308(2) and 108 read with Section 3(5) of the BNS, 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. 4 (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 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 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 Rajshekhar