1 2025:CGHC:4529 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8981 of 2024 Sandeep Sahu S/o Ashok Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Purana Bazar Para, Surajpur, P.S- Tahsil And District- Surajpur, C.G ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Surajpur, District- Surajpur, C.G ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate. For Non-Applicant(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Mr. Dinesh Tiwari alongwith Mr. Suresh Sharma, Advocates Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24/01/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 557/2024 registered at Police Station AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Surajpur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under 296(B), 115(2), 310(2), 309(6), 109, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on October 7, 2024, the complainant, Anuj Kumar Awasthi, went to a program at Old Bus Stand, Bazarpara, Surajpur, but due to the crowd, he went to the roof of the complex. There, he met the applicant, Sandeep Sahu, and his friends, who started abusing him with filthy language. When Anuj asked them to stop, Sandeep assaulted him, took Rs.1500/- from his shirt pocket, and snatched a gold chain from his neck, then pushed him off the roof. Even after Anuj fell and apologized repeatedly, Sandeep and his friends continued to beat him by kicks and fists, causing serious injuries to his hands, feet, and head. Thereafter, the offence has been registered against the applicant other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that the brother of applicant, namely, Kuldeep Sahu, is accused of committing murder of wife and daughter of Head Constable posted in Police Station, Surajpur, but the applicant was not named in the said FIR and due to the said case, various cases have been registered against the family members of the applicant. He also submits that the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature. The applicant is in jail since 17.10.2024, the applicant has two criminal antecedents under the IPC and in both cases, he has been enlarged on bail and in both 3 cases, charge-sheet has not been filed, further charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. Learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that though the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons have snatched gold chain of complainant, assaulted him and took Rs.1500/- from him, but there is no recovery of gold chain only Rs.1500/- has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, further the applicant has two criminal antecedents under the IPC, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. Learned counsel for the objector vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submit that all the family members of applicant were involved in various offences of committing organized crime, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 17.10.2024, though the allegation against the applicant that he alongwith other co-accused persons have snatched gold chain of complainant, assaulted him and took Rs.1500/- from him, but there is no recovery of gold chain from the possession of the applicant, so far as Rs.1500/- is concerned, it has not been ascertain whether the 4 said amount is looted money, also considering the fact that learned counsel for the objector could not dispute the fact that the applicant is involved in the murder case of wife and daughter of Head Constable alongwith his brother, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, the applicant has two criminal antecedents, which are under the IPC and in both cases he has already been granted bail, further charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicant-Sandeep Sahu, involved in Crime No. 557/2024 registered at Police Station Surajpur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under 296(B), 115(2), 310(2), 309(6), 109, 3(5) of BNS, 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 5 the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings 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. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil