1 2025:CGHC:3135 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8945 of 2024 1 - Nitin Rajpurohit S/o Gulab Singh Rajpurohit, Aged About 30 Years R/o Shankar Nagar Mahasamund, Police Station, Tehsil And District- Mahasamund (C.G.). 2 - Deepak Singh Thakur S/o Lt. Rujju Thakur, Aged About 39 Years R/o Ward No. 9, Chhipiyapara, Mahasamund, Thana, Tehsil And District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through-S.H.O. Police Station-Mahasamund, District-Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Deputy A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17.01.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 566/2024, registered at Police Station : Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 324(4), 351(2), 331(6) and 191(2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.01.20 10:48:49 +0530 2 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 28.11.2024, at around 1:30 AM, the two present applicants, along with 15-20 other individuals armed with clubs, swords, and rods, attempted to destroy the complainant’s property. They started banging on the doors of the complainant’s house and forcibly entered. Based on the complainant’s statement, the police registered an offence under Sections 296, 351(2), 324(4), 331(4), and 191(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) and subsequently arrested both applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the applicants are said to have assaulted the injured persons, and the injuries are found to be simple in nature. He further submits that the applicant No. 01 has 04 criminal antecedents of the year 2016 and 2020 and applicant No.02 has 10 criminal antecedents of the year 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2022 out of which he has been acquitted in 04 cases, in 05 cases, trial is concluded as compromise and 01 case is pending. He later submitted that in the present case, co- accused persons, namely, Sushil Soni, Manoj Kumar and Pankaj Sahu have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 10.01.2025 and 19.12.2024 passed in MCRC Nos. 229/2025 and 8876/2024 respectively. Further, the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicants are in jail since 05.12.2024 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail on the ground of parity. 3 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant No. 01 has 04 criminal antecedents of the year 2016 and 2020 and applicant No.02 has 10 criminal antecedents of the year 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2022 which shows that the applicants are a habitual offender. He further submitted that the present applicants assaulted the injured, resulting in grievous injuries. Therefore, the present applicants are not entitled to be granted regular bail in this case. 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 that the injuries received by the injured person is found to be simple in nature, moreover, the applicant No. 01 has 04 criminal antecedents of the year 2016 and 2020 and applicant No.02 has 10 criminal antecedents of the year 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2022 out of which he has been acquitted in 04 cases, in 05 cases, trial is concluded as compromise and 01 case is pending and in the present case, co-accused persons, namely, Sushil Soni, Manoj Kumar and Pankaj Sahu have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 10.01.2025 and 19.12.2024 passed in MCRC Nos. 229/2025 and 8876/2024 respectively. Further, the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicants are in jail since 05.12.2024, the conclusion of the trial may take some 4 more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Applicants – Nitin Rajpurohit and Deepak Singh Thakur, involved in Crime No. 566/2024, registered at Police Station : Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 324(4), 351(2), 331(6) and 191(2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing 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 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 5 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan