1 2025:CGHC:4068 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8575 of 2024 Dilip Kumar Prajapati S/o Mahettar Singh Prajapati Aged About 47 Years R/o Bhadrapara Padimal, Police Station Balco, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Baikunthpur District Koriya, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Advocate General. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22/01/2025 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 they have been arrested in connection with FIR No. 333/2024, registered at Police Station – Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 339, 318, 336, 338, 340 and 308 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2 The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Superintendent of Police of Police Station Koriya has received a notice from advocate Omprakash PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.01.23 19:40:40 +0530 2 Joshi who has sent the said notice on behalf of Anita Prajapati whereby the amount of rupees 5,00,000/- has been demanded from the police ofÏ- cer by making a false allegations, on having the doubt on the authenticity of said notice the investigation was conducted and after several investi- gations by the police ofÏcers it has been found that the said notice was sent by applicant in pursuant to take revenge from his wife and his wife's advocate as the maintenance of rupees 14,000/- per month has been passed by the Hon'ble High Court in FAM no. 45 of 2019, on dated 31.01.2023 (Annexure A/2 is the copy of order passed in FAM no. 45 of 2019), therefore considering the above story the FIR was registered on against the applicant under section 339, 318, 336, 338, 340 and 308 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3 It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the applicant has been arrested only on the basis of suspicion and not further solid evidence has been produced before this Court. He further submitted the FIR appears to be a retaliatory action based on the applicant's personal dispute with his wife. He further submitted that the order of maintenance of Rs. 14,000/- per month passed in favour of applicant's wife in FAM No. 45 of 2019 has been challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, registered as Diary No. 29891 of 2023 which is still pending for its consideration. He later submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 25.10.2024 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. 3 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 applicant has been arrested only on the basis of suspicion and no direct evidence linking between the applicant to the drafting or sending the notice, as alleged by the prosecution, further considering that it is a matrimonial dispute, the charge-sheet has been filed which is taken on record and he is in jail since 25.10.2024 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 - Dilip Kumar Prajapati, involved in FIR No. 333/2024, registered at Police Station – Baikunthpur District Koriya (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 339, 318, 336, 338, 340 and 308 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on each of them 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 court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under 4 Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail dur- ing trial and in order to secure his presence, proclama- tion 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 initi- ate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, be- fore 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 applicants are deliber- ate or without sufÏcient 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 OfÏce 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