1 2025:CGHC:107 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8901 of 2024 Dinesh Kumar Yadav S/o Late Shri Kripa Ram Yadav, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village-Khairjhiti, Thana-Tumgaon, Tahsil And District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Tumgaon, District-Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.01.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.153/2024, registered at Police Station- Tumgaon, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 121, 132, 221 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, the complainant namely, Sanjeev Banjare Constable of P.S. Tumgaon has lodged the report 2 stating that one victim came to police station for lodging the report of outraging the modesty against the applicant at that time applicant became violent and abused the police persons and also caused the injury by hand and fist so on the basis of the report the abovementioned offences have been registered and after completion of the investigation charge-sheet is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the complainant with the collusion of the victim of crime No. 152/2024 as the applicant appeared in the police station and raised the objection regarding false averment of outraging the modesty in the public transport vehicle then the police persons have caught hold the applicant beaten him badly and to save themselves registered the crime No. 153/2024. He further submits that the applicant has arrested in the present case on the allegation of obstructing the public servant in discharging his duty, it is pertinent to mention here that the victim girl before whom the said incident is taken place, her statement has not been recorded and only the statement of 4 police persons is recorded to develop the concocted story. The complainant is a police person posted in the same police station and it is not possible for the applicant to misbehave or cause the injury to the police at police station. He further submits that the prosecution story is not corroborated with the medical evidence as the MLC of the complainant shows that there is no external injury seen over his body therefore, all the allegations are baseless and 3 are only levelled against the applicant to implicate him in a false case and in the present case charge-sheet has filed before the competent Court further there is one another case registered against him on the same day in which separate application is filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and besides this case, one another case registered against him on the same day. She further stated that the evidence collected in the records indicates that there is prima facie evidence against the accused for the alleged offence. The accused is also shown to have committed a serious offence by obstructing and assaulting Police Constable/Sanjeev Banjare, who was performing his ofÏcial duties, tearing his uniform, and pulling off his police badge. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence and the fact that the victim is a major girl, aged about 27 years and also considering the victim’s statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and the MLC of the complainant shows that there is no external injury seen over his body and in the present case, charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the present applicant is languishing in jail since 4 30.09.2024, and the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant -Dinesh Kumar Yadav, involved in Crime No.153/2024, registered at Police Station- Tumgaon, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 121, 132, 221 of Bhartiya 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 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 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 5 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 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 copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal