1 2025:CGHC:52342 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8468 of 2025 Damru @ Rajesh Yadav S/o Late Ghushuram Yadav Aged About 29 Years R/o Ruwabhandha Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh (Father Name Of The Applicant Is Not Properly Mentioned In The Impugned Order Which Is Being Mentioned As Per The Charge Sheet) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O, Police Station Bhilai Nagar District - Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27/10/2025 1. This is the 8rst bail application 8led under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 364/2025 registered at Police Station- Bhilai Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.) for the o<ence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 126(2), 117(2), 309(6), 3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that the complainant Akhilesh Rai KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 has lodged a report before the police station Bhilai Nagar, that on intervening night of 12.07.2025, his grandson is a fruit seller and he was returning from Ruabandha Market and near Panthi Chowk, present applicant along with other co-accused came there and starting assaulting him with bamboo stick, hand and feast then the police registered the above crime number364/2025 and during the investigation the police again recorded statement of the victim and then mention an story that the applicant and other co-accused also looted his mobile and Rs. 12000/-, based on the complainant's report, the police registered an o<ence under Crime No. 364/2025, against, the applicant and other accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that no any weapon or looted article was recovered from possession of present applicant. The present case is only a case of assault and free 8ghting and no any loot is happened with the victim and an afterthought story is developed by the victim and the complaint to trap the applicant in major o<ence. He furtehr submits that in FIR registered by the complainant there is no any mentioned about the loot of mobile and the money and a false seizure of mobile is prepared by the prosecution and the injury sustained by assault of present applicant is simple in nature and there was only fracture in right ankle of the injured and in the present case charge-sheet has been 8led before the competent Court and the applicant has no criminal antecedent and further the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays 3 for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the applicant is alleged to have assaulted the injured, namely Deepak Rai. As per the MLC report, the injured had undergone surgery in the ankle region of his left leg, where a fracture was found. It is further submitted that, as regards the head injury, only an abrasion was noticed. Accordingly, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 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 investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has been 8led before the competent Court further as per the MLC report, the injured had undergone surgery in the ankle region of his left leg, where a fracture was found and as regards the head injury, only an abrasion was noticed and further the applicant has not named in the FIR and he is in jail since 17.08.2025 and the applicant has no criminal antecedent thus, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant -Damru @ Rajesh Yadav, involved in Crime No. 364/2025 registered at Police Station- Bhilai Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.) for the o<ence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 126(2), 117(2), 309(6), 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 4 conditions:- (i) The applicant shall 8le an undertaking to the e<ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 8xed 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 8xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without suBcient 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 8xed 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 8xed 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 suBcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him 5 in accordance with law. 8. OBce is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal