1 2025:CGHC:728 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9108 of 2024 Satish Dewangan S/o Late Shri Seetaram Dewangan Aged About 56 Years R/o Bandhwapara, Arvind Nagar, Nootan Chowck, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer (S.H.O.), P.S.- Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Devershi Thakur , Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 06.01.2025 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. 666/2024, registered at Police Station – P.S.- Ratanpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 108 of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that in the midst of 27-28.09.2024, the deceased Parasram Dewangan and Parati Dewangan had committed suicide by hanging themselves at the Dewangan Samaj Bhavan, Vill; PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.01.07 12:26:30 +0530 2 Lakhma, P.S-Ratanpur, Dist; Bilaspur (C.G). The matter was reported at 9:00 hrs, & Merg Intimation was registered at 12:30hrs with the reasons unknown of the suicide. Merg no.95/ 2024, and 96/2024 were enquired, thereafter FIR was lodged on 27.10.2024 with allegations, that the applicant used to harass the deceased for which they had resorted to the unfortunate step leaving behind suicide note on the wall and a diary which, and mobile of the deceased were seized from Akash Dewangan/Son of the deceased. It was majorly alleged that the Deceased's son had purchased a Moped /Activa in 2022 in the name of the deceased/Paras Ram, which was mortgaged with the present applicant for Rs.20,000/-, and the Finance company had seized the Vehicle bearing registration No.CG-10-BJ-7804 subsequently of the default. Further, it was alleged that the payments were not being paid to the Bunkars/labors/Deceased and were being forced to pay the rent of the Bhavan @ Rs.200/month, with electricity they were consuming. The applicant was arrested after lodging of the FIR on 27.10.2024 where no seizures were made form the applicant, and subsequently charge sheet was filled on 29.11.2024. 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 applicant and deceased/Parasram were cousins, where both the deceased couple were ousted from their house by their sons and daughter-in-law, after which they had resorted to live and work in the Samajik Bhavan as Bunkars, where they were working as weavers since long. He further submitted that the initially till registration of Mergs no reasons were primafacie found, and the seizures of mobile and suicide notes were only made from the son of the deceased who had come to the Bhavan an evening before the incident and had a quarrel 3 with the deceased which had been witnessed other labours and the CCTV could have confirmed the same but had not been made part of the charge-sheet. He also submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 27.10.2024 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. 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 no any recovery from the present applicant, further, the suicide-note on the wall and the mobile of the deceased were seized from the Akash Dewangan/son of the deceased who had came to the Bhavan an evening before the incident and had quarrel with the deceased, further the charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 27.10.2024 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. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Satish Dewangan, involved in Crime No. 666/2024, registered at Police Station – P.S.- Ratanpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 108 of Bharatiya Nyay 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 4 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 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