1 2025:CGHC:409 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8461 of 2024 Rocky Lanjhewar S/o Late Surendra Kumar Lanjhewar Aged About 33 Years R/o Behind Hero Showroom Chhawani, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer Police Station Chhawani, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anurag Jha, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.01.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 297/2024, registered at Police Station : Chhawani, Bhilai, District : Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 436 of Indian Penal Code. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Mohini Lanjewar, filed a written report at the Chhawani Police Station stating that on the night of June 28, 2024, she was at her in-laws’ house near Shramik Nagar, ACC Chowk. Around 1:00 AM, her husband, Rocky, called her and said, “I have taken revenge on you; 2 I have set your house on fire.” When she returned to her house at 7:00 AM, she found the door open. Upon entering, she saw that her TV, double bed, dining table, gas stove, groceries, windows, doors, ceiling fan, cooler, clothes, ration card, and the Aadhaar cards of herself and her children, namely, Srishti, Himanshi, and Yogiraj along with all certificates and school documents, had been burnt to ashes. When she inquired, Tulyansh Gajbhiyye and Vasu Sende informed her that it was her husband, Rocky, who had set the house on fire during the night. Earlier, he had written a letter from jail, threatening her as an act of revenge for a previous FIR she had filed against him, and it was he who orchestrated this incident. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case, as there is no concrete evidence against him regarding the commission of the alleged offence. He further submits that the applicant has been arrested solely on suspicion and due to his involvement in old cases. He also submits that the allegations leveled against the applicant are vague and general, with no eyewitnesses to the incident. Moreover, the applicant has been falsely implicated while the actual masterminds behind the act remain uninvestigated. It is evident from the complainant’s own statements that the applicant had no participation in the alleged incident, yet no proper investigation has been conducted to uncover the truth. He further submits that the present applicant has 04 criminal antecedents in which all cases have been disposed off and the applicant has been in jail since 29.06.2024 and the trial is likely 3 to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. She submits that the present applicant has 06 criminal antecedents. She further submits that the applicant/husband, Rocky, who had set the house on fire, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 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, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant happens to be the husband of the complainant and there appears to be a matrimonial dispute arisen between the parties and also considering the fact that the charge- sheet has been filed and he has been in jail since 29.06.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. 7. Let applicant, Rocky Lanjhewar, involved in Crime No. 297/2024, registered at Police Station : Chhawani, Bhilai, District : Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 436 of Indian Penal Code, 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 he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 4 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 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan