1 2025:CGHC:6605 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 450 of 2025 Ritesh @ Goriya Gandhi S/o Late Sampat Lal Gandhi Aged About 34 Years R/o Ward No. 14, Arjunda, District Balod Chhattisgarh (Name Correctly Mentioned In Pg-6 And Annexure-A1) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through SHO Police Station Arjunda, District - Balod Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 05.02.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 157/2024, registered at Police Station – Arjunda, District - Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5), 221,131, 117(2), 121(2) of BNS and Section 3 of Chhattisgarh Medical Servants and Medical Services Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage or PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.02.06 11:56:47 +0530 2 Loss of Property) Act, 2010. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the complainant, namely, Manesh Kumar lodged a report that he is posted as guard in CHC Arjunda and on 30.07.2024 at about 09:15 pm present applicant and his one friend came there and hot talk exchanged between the complainant and the applicant regarding fast treatment of the applicant and his friend as they were injured in a road accident and thereafter they assaulted them and caused injuries to the complainant and therefore the police registered the above offences against the present applicant and his friend. Hence, this bail application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the co-accused, namely, Drivesh @ Dampi Dewangan has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 14.01.2025 passed in MCRC No. 286/2025. He further submits that the applicant has 10 previous criminal antecedents, out of which 02 are under the IPC, in which one case the applicant has deposited the fine and in one case he has been acquitted, 05 cases are under the Excise Act, in which in 03 cases he has been acquitted and 02 cases the applicant has deposited the fine and 03 cases are under the Gambling Act, in one case he has deposited the fine, one case is disposed of and in one case he has been acquitted. He also submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 20.09.2024 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 the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. He further submitted that the complainant Manesh Kumar lodged a report 3 that he is posted as guard in CHC Arjunda and on 390.07.2024 at about 09:15 PM present applicant and his one friend came there and hot talk exchanged between the complainant and the applicant regarding fast treatment of the applicant and his friend as they were injured in a road accident and thereafter they assaulted them and caused injuries to the complainant, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the co-accused, namely, Drivesh @ Dampi Dewangan has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 14.01.2025 passed in MCRC No. 286/2025 and the applicant has 10 previous criminal antecedents, out of which 02 are under the IPC, in which one case the applicant has deposited the fine and in one case he has been acquitted, 05 cases are under the Excise Act, in which in 03 cases he has been acquitted and 02 cases the applicant has deposited the fine and 03 cases are under the Gambling Act, in one case he has deposited the fine, one case is disposed of and in one case he has been acquitted, further the charge- sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 20.09.2024 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 - Ritesh @ Goriya Gandhi, involved in Crime No. 157/2024, registered at Police Station – Arjunda, District - Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5), 221, 131, 117(2), 4 121(2) of BNS and Section 3 of Chhattisgarh Medical Servants and Medical Services Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage or Loss of Property) Act, 2010, 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 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 5 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 certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti