1 2025:CGHC:7752 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8588 of 2024 1. Ravindra Kumar Baghel S/o Bajrang Baghel Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Rokel, P.S. Chhindgarh, District Sukma Chhattisgarh 2. Bhagesh Kuhrami S/o Lachhu Ram Kuhrami Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Rokel, P.S. Chhindgarh, District Sukma Chhattisgarh 3. Bhima Kuhrami S/o Handa Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Rokel, P.S. Chhindgarh, District Sukma Chhattisgarh 4. Dewaram Kuhrami S/o Joga Kuhrami Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Rokel, P.S. Chhindgarh, District Sukma Chhattisgarh 5. Handa Ram Kuhrami S/o Hunga Kuhrami Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Rokel, P.S. Chhindgarh, District Sukma Chhattisgarh 6. Kosa Sodhi S/o Hurra Sodhi Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Nawabodki, Aatulkhuta, P.S. And District Malkangiri Orissa ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Kukanaar District Sukma Chhattisgarh District Durg Chhattisgarh …..Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Mayank Mulchandani, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.02.14 10:48:48 +0530 2 Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.02.2025 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 24/2024 registered at Police Station Kukanaar, District Sukma (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 191(2), 296(b), 310(2) and 331(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution alleges that on 11.11.2024, at around 10:00 pm, the present applicants forcibly entered the complainant's house, took a tractor along with a thresher, and committed dacoity. When the complainant questioned why the tractor was being taken, the driver, Rajesh, abused the complainant. All the accused, with common intention, took away the tractor without the complainant's permission. Consequently, a crime was registered at P.S. Kukanaar, District Sukma (C.G.). 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the complaint and accused persons have resolved their dispute and there is no possibility of dispute arising in future between the parties. He further submits that the applicants have no criminal antecedents and they are in jail since 12.11.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application 3 of the present applicants and submits that the charge -sheet has already been submitted before competent Court in the present matter. 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 further the fact that the complaint and the present applicants have already been compromised the matter, the applicants have no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the charge - sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and they are in jail since 12.11.2024 and the conclusion of the trial may take some more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicants – 1. Ravindra Kumar Baghel, 2. Bhagesh Kuhrami, 3. Bhima Kuhrami, 4. Dewaram Kuhrami, 5. Handa Ram Kuhrami, 6. Kosa Sodhi, involved in Crime No. 24/2024 registered at Police Station Kukanaar, District Sukma (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 191(2), 296(b), 310(2) and 331(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 4 bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are deliberate 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 them 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 Abhishek