1 2025:CGHC:4064 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8806 of 2024 1. Santosh Nirmalkar S/o Durdeshi Nirmalkar Aged About 50 Years R/o Bajrang Nagar, Gogaon, P.S. Khamtarai, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2. Mukund Nirmalkar S/o Santosh Nirmalkar Aged About 31 Years R/o Bajrang Nagar, Gogaon, P.S. Khamtarai, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicants versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer. Police- Khamtaraij, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Yogesh Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.01.2025 1. The applicants have 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 Crime No. 575/2024, registered at Police Station – Khamtarai, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 118(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that оп 10.07.2024, complainant PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.01.23 19:40:38 +0530 2 Ghanshyam Prasad Maheshwer lodged report before Khamtrai police station on 11.07.2024 by stating that when complainant son Yogendra Singh Maheshwer along with his friend Uday Maheshwer and other boys went to neighborhood near Gond Para temple of Gondwara then on 10.07.2024 at around 8:30 pm, when Santosh Nirmalkar and his son Mukund Nirmalkar @ Chhotu with other people quarreled by abusing them due to old dispute, due to which son Yogendra Maheshwer got injured in the back of the head and below the shoulder and Uday Maheshwer got injured in the thigh and stomach, further they threatened them. The said incident was witnessed by Yogendra and Uday, and on the basis of the above report of complainant, police registered offence under Section 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 118(2), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita 2023 against the accused persons. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case and there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicants. It is further submitted that the counter FIR has been lodged by both the parties and both sides have received injuries and the FIR which was lodged from the side of the applicant was for offence under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code along with other offences. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicants are in jail since 25.11.2024 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 opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that the counter FIR has been lodged by both the parties and both sides have received injuries and the FIR which was lodged from the side of the applicant was for offence under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code along with other offences, further there is no any criminal antecedents registered against the present applicants, the charge-sheet has been filed against the applicants, the applicants are in jail since 25.11.2024 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 Nos. 1 and 2 - Santosh Nirmalkar and Mukund Nirmalkar, involved in Crime No. 575/2024, registered at Police Station – Khamtaraij, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 118(2), 3(5) 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 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 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 4 Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their 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 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 applicant is 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 Preeti