1 2025:CGHC:46918 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7307 of 2025 Padmani @ Gulshan Begum W/o Sheikh Gaffar Aged About 38 Years R/o Rajbandha Maidan, Moudahapara, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Ganj, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State. : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.09.2025 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 391/2024 registered at Police Station Ganj, District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 111, 61(2), 249 r/w 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 04.11.2024, information was received at Police Station Ganj, Raipur, from Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur, that one person, namely Shaikh Sahil, had been brought to the hospital with a gunshot injury and was undergoing treatment. On the basis of the said information, the police conducted an ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.09.12 18:50:31 +0530 2 inquiry and found that the incident had taken place in front of Central Jail, Raipur, where three accused persons, namely Shahrukh, Shehnawaz @ Shalu, and Heera Chhurra, along with other co-accused, had opened fire at Shaikh Sahil with the intention to kill him. Further, during investigation, it was revealed that the present applicant was a part of the conspiracy in the alleged offence. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that there is no legal material or evidence on record constituting any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that even if the case of the prosecution is taken at its face value, it is alleged that the planning for the alleged offence took place at the residence of the applicant. It is further alleged that she provided shelter to the co-accused persons in her house after the commission of the offence. The said allegations of the prosecution are based solely on the statements of the co-accused persons, which are not acceptable in the eyes of law. He submits that the present applicant has no record and she is in jail since 06.11.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge -sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and also endorse the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant that she has no criminal antecedents. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the allegation against the applicant is limited to providing 3 shelter to the co-accused persons in her house after the commission of the aforesaid offence, the case of the present applicant stands distinguished from that of the co-accused, namely Shahrukh, Shehnawaz @ Shalu, and Heera Chhurra. Moreover, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 06.11.2024. As the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let the Applicant – Padmani @ Gulshan Begum, involved in Crime No. 391/2024 registered at Police Station Ganj, District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 111, 61(2), 249 r/w 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing 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 she 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her 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 her 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 her, 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 her in accordance with law. 8. 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