1 2025:CGHC:414 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8553 of 2024 Mukul Suna S/o Prakash Suna Aged About 25 Years R/o Steel City Risali Hanuman Temple P.S. Nevai District Durg, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S H O, Police Station Bhilai Nagar, District Durg, C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate 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. 285/2024, registered at Police Station : Bhilai Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 307, 120B, 212, 109, 34 of Indian Penal Code and 25, 27 of Arms Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Ramanjeet Singh, lodged a report at the Bhilai Nagar Police Station stating that on 26.06.2024, at about 1:20 AM, he was returning with 2 his friend Aditya on a motorcycle. When they reached near the Sector 10 Central Avenue Road Bridge, two persons approached them on a motorcycle, accusing them of abusing them. Shortly afterward, two more persons arrived in a car. All four persons began abusing and assaulting the complainant and his friend, threatening to kill them with a gun. One of the person on the motorcycle, who identified himself as Amit Josh, pulled out a gun and started firing at the complainant and his friend. After firing 2-3 shots, Amit Josh fled the scene on his motorcycle with his accomplice. During the firing, Sunil Yadav sustained injuries to his left wrist and stomach, while Aditya Singh sustained an injury to the left side of his stomach. The complainant took his injured friends to the hospital and subsequently filed a complaint at the police station. During the investigation, the police arrested the present applicant, and the aforementioned offences were registered against him. Hence, this bail application has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the said allegation is against the main accused, namely, Amit Josh, and not against the present applicant, he was only accompanied with the main accused. He also submits that the present applicant has 13 criminal antecedents under the IPC out of which in 05 cases he has already been acquitted and remaining 08 cases are still pending. He further submits that the other co-accused persons namely, Shankar Bhat, B. Lucky George, Ankur Sharma and Rupesh Singh, in MCRC Nos. 5380/2024, 5843/2024 and 7243/2024, vide 3 orders dated 04.10.2024, 07.11.2024 and 13.11.2024 have already been granted regular bail by this Hon’ble Court respectively. Therefore, he submits that the present applicant is also entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that though the co-accused persons, namely, Shankar Bhat, B. Lucky George, Ankur Sharma and Rupesh Singh, in MCRC Nos. 5380/2024, 5843/2024 and 7243/2024, vide orders dated 04.10.2024, 07.11.2024 and 13.11.2024 have already been granted regular bail by this Hon’ble Court respectively, but the applicant has given shelter to the main accused and is having 13 criminal antecedents against him, therefore, the applicant 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 that the allegations pertain to the main accused, Amit Josh, and not to the present applicant, who was merely accompanying the main accused at the time. Also considering the fact that the present applicant has 13 criminal antecedents under the IPC out of which in 05 cases he has already been acquitted and remaining 08 cases are still pending and further the fact that the other co-accused persons, namely, Shankar Bhat, B. Lucky George, Ankur Sharma and Rupesh Singh, in MCRC Nos. 5380/2024, 5843/2024 and 7243/2024, vide orders dated 04.10.2024, 07.11.2024 and 13.11.2024 have already been granted regular bail by this Hon’ble Court respectively. Also considering the 4 fact that the charge - sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and he is in since 05.07.2024 and the conclusion of the trial may takes some more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Applicant – Mukul Suna, involved in Crime No. 285/2024 registered at Police Station Bhilai Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 120-B, 212, 109, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25 and 27 of 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 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 5 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