1 2025:CGHC:6888 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 526 of 2025 Dileshwar Sonkar S/o Kunwar Sonkar Aged About 24 Years, R/o Ward No. 5, Nadiyapara Gunderdehi, Police Station Gunderdehi, District Balod Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Gunderdehi, District – Balod, Chhattisgah. ...Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Amit Nayak, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06/02/2025 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. 312/2024, registered at Police Station – Gunderdehi, District Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 191(2), 296, 324(2), 331(2), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2 According to the prosecution's story, on 16.12.2024, at around 9:00 P.M., while the complainant was having dinner, the applicant, along PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.02.07 15:07:34 +0530 2 with co-accused Ramkumar, Ishwarbai, Neerabai, Sakunbai, Golu Sonkar, and others, broke the iron sheet on the main gate in front of the complainant's house. They then entered the house, broke the latch on the door of the room where the complainant was locked inside, entered the room, and physically assaulted her. The complainant reported the incident at the concerned police station, and an offense was registered against the applicant. 3 It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the injuries sustained by the complainant is not grievous in nature. He later submitted that there was some family dispute between the complainant and the applicant family, therefore a false case is registered against the present applicant. He further submits that the applicant is having 10 previous criminal antecedents, out of which 04 cases are disposed of, in 03 cases fine amount has been deposited and in 01 case compromised has been taken between the parties and two cases are pending. He further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 28.12.2024 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 opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted. He further submitted that the applicant along with other co-accused person broke the iron sheet on the main gate in front of the complainant’s house. They then entered the house, broke the latch on the door of the room where the complainant was locked inside, entered the room, and physically assaulted her. Therefore, he is not entitled to 3 be released on bail. 5 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused 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 the injuries sustained by the complainant is simple in nature, further the applicant is having 10 previous criminal antecedents, out of which four cases have been disposed of, three cases have resulted in the payment of fines and one case has been settled through a compromise between the parties, additionally, two cases are still pending, further the charge-sheet has been filed and he is in jail since 28.12.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7 Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Dileshwar Sonkar, involved in Crime No. 312/2024, registered at Police Station – Gunderdehi, District Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 191(2), 296, 324(2), 331(2), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 4 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 his 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 his, 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 his 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 Preeti