1 2025:CGHC:51391 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8056 of 2025 Suraj Verma S/o Shri Arun Verma Aged About 26 Years R/o Village- Tilda, Ward No. 17, P.S. Tilda Neora, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Tilda Neora, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 8310 of 2025 Rajat Verma S/o Shri Rajendra Verma Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Chhataud, P.S. Tilda Neora, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Tilda Neora, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : None For Respondent(s) : Ms. Supriya Upasne, G.A. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 15.10.2025 1. The applicants have preferred these First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.358/2025, registered at Police Station- Tilda Neora, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 232-1, 190 of the BNS. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, a written compliant was lodged by the complainant stating that he was served with a Court summon by the police of Tilda Neora, informing him that he had to appear in Court to give his statement. Accordingly, on the morning of 07.08.2025, he left his home around 10:00 a.m. to go to the Raipur Court. It is alleged that during his absence, the applicants along with other co-accused persons went to the house of the complainant and threatened him, who was a witness in a case, not to give truthful testimony, thereby attempting to influence the witness. It has also been stated that the complainant was receiving phone calls from several unknown numbers, and the callers identified themselves as Lukky Maharaj and Gappu. 3. From perusal of the bail application, it transpires that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case and they have not committed alleged offences of threatening the witnesses. 3 Furthermore, one co-accused person namely, Deepak Verma has already been enlarged on bail by the trial Court vide order dated 30.08.2025 and another co-accused namely- Ravikant Varma has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order 07.10.2025 in MCRC No. 7891 of 2025 and further, the case is present applicants is identical to that of the co-accused. It further transpires from the records that charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case as the same has been mentioned in the bail granting order of the co-accused. So far criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, as per para 4A of the bail application, the applicant- Rajat Verma has no previous criminal antecedents and applicant- Suraj Verma has only one previous criminal antecedent under the Arms Act of the year 2022, in which, he has already been acquitted by the Competent Court. Lastly, the applicants are languishing in jail since 18.08.2025 and hence they prays for grant of bail on the ground of parity. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail applications of the applicants and submits that so far as co-accused persons who have been granted bail are concerned, they were not assigned any overt act as they were present outside the house meanwhile, the present applicants are the main accused, who assaulted the complainant’s family. 5. I have heard learned counsel for State and perused the case diary. 4 6. Considering the fact that one co-accused person namely, Deepak Verma has already been enlarged on bail by the trial Court vide order dated 30.08.2025 and another co-accused namely- Ravikant Varma has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order 07.10.2025 in MCRC No. 7891 of 2025 and further, the case is present applicants is identical to that of the co-accused and further, so far criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, as per para 4A of the bail application, the applicant- Rajat Verma has no previous criminal antecedents and applicant- Suraj Verma has only one previous criminal antecedent under the Arms Act of the year 2022, in which, he has already been acquitted by the Competent Court, the charge-sheet has already been filed and applicants are languishing in jail since 18.08.2025, this Court is of the opinion that its is a fit case to enlarge the applicants on bail on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, applicants- Suraj Verma and Rajat Verma, involved in Crime No.358/2025, registered at Police Station- Tilda Neora, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 232- 1, 190 of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (each) 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, 5 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them 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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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 sufficient cause, 6 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. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. 9. After passing of the order, Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing for applicants appears and submits that his presence may be marked in the case. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal