1 2025:CGHC:9815 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 13 of 2025 Vinod Bairagi S/o Shankar Bairagi Aged About 25 Years Near Iqra School, Pandri , P.S. Civil Lines District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh P.S. Vidhan Sabha, District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 27.02.2025 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. 38/2024, registered at Police Station – Vidhan Sabha, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 294, 506, 323, 324 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, IPC). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that on 15.01.2024 there was a quarrel between the complainant namely, Rajesh Bairagi, and Deep Bairagi, on the name of fetching water from near the complainant’s house, on 16.01.2024, when the complainant was standing near Gaura Gauri 2 Chowk, Deep Bairagi along with his family members started abusing him on account of quarrel took between them on previous day of incident. Hence, this 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 and there are 4 criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant out of which 3 are under the Gambling Act and one is under the IPC, and in all the cases the applicant is on bail. It is further submitted that the charge- sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that the applicant along with other co-accused persons are involved in the present case, and there is no any specific allegations levelled against the applicant for assaulting the injured with sharp weapon, whereas the main allegation is levelled against the co-accused persons namely Lakhan Bairagi and Deep Bairagi. The applicant is in jail since 16.01.2024 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 that there are 4 criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant out of which 3 are under the Gambling Act and one is under the IPC, and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that on 15.01.2024 there was a quarrel between the complainant namely, Rajesh Bairagi, and Deep Bairagi, on the name of fetching water from near the complainant’s house, on 16.01.2024, when the complainant was standing near Gaura Gauri Chowk, Deep Bairagi along with his family members started abusing him on account of quarrel took between them on previous day of incident, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 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 there are 4 criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant out of which 3 are under the Gambling Act and one is under the IPC, and in all the cases the applicant is on bail, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, further the fact that the applicant along with other co-accused persons are involved in the present case, and there is no any specific allegations levelled against the applicant for assaulting the injured with sharp weapon, whereas the main allegation is levelled against the co-accused persons namely Lakhan Bairagi and Deep Bairagi, the applicant is in jail since 16.01.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. 7. Let applicant, Vinod Bairagi, involved in Crime No. 38/2024, registered at Police Station – Vidhan Sabha, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 294, 506, 323, 324 and 34 of the IPC, 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 4 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 Rajshekhar