1 2025:CGHC:50979 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8077 of 2025 1 - Laxman Yadav S/o Suklal Yadav Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Bagbuda Gram Panchayat Lamna, Thana Bango, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 2 - Vishram Yadav S/o Suklal Yadav Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Bagbuda Gram Panchayat Lamna, Thana Bango, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 3 - Ram Bhajan Yadav S/o Suklal Yadav Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Bagbuda Gram Panchayat Lamna, Thana Bango, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bango, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicants : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13/10/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 94/2025 registered at Police Station- Bango, District- Korba (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 221, 296, 121(1), 132, 109 of BNS Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that a theft of cash amount and house articles were made from the house of one Rajesh Soni due to which police person went to the house of suspected person namely Banju Yadav and asked details of his family members thereafter the family members of suspected person got angry and assaulted the police person and received injury. Thereafter police lodged FIR under Section 191(2), 191(3), 190, 221, 296, 121(1), 132, 109 of B.N.S. Act against the family members of suspected person and arrested them. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the present case, having no connection whatsoever with the alleged offence. It is submitted that the applicants are uncles of the suspected person, namely Banju Yadav and are neither residing with him nor involved in the incident, as they are merely his neighbours. It is further submitted that the other family members of the applicants have also been falsely implicated and arrested, only to harass the family. The applicants and their relatives never assaulted any police personnel nor used any abusive language, yet the police have lodged the FIR without any substantive evidence. He further submits that the co- accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 6879/2025 (order dated 01.09.2025), MCRC No. 3 7754/2025 (order dated 25.09.2025), MCRC No. 497/2025 (order dated 17.01.2025) and MCRC No. 684/2025 (order dated 24.01.2025), and the case of the present applicants stands on identical footing. The applicants are in jail since 23.10.2024, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, hence, bail is prayed for on the ground of parity. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the charge- sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, which also includes offences under the SC/ST Act. However, the present bail application has been preferred only for the offences other than those under the SC/ST Act. It is further submitted that the FIR was originally registered for offences under the BNSS and not under the provisions of the SC/ST Act. The earlier bail application filed by the applicant was rejected by the trial Court prior to the filing of the charge-sheet. Hence, the present application has been filed before this Court seeking grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that a theft of cash amount and house articles were made form the house of one Rajesh Soni due to which Police went to the house of suspected person namely Banju Yadav and asked details of his family members thereafter the family members (applicants) of suspected person got angry and assaulted the Police personnel due to which he received injuries. Accordingly, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 29.06.2025 and further the fact that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 6879/2025 (order dated 01.09.2025), MCRC No. 7754/2025 (order dated 25.09.2025), MCRC No. 497/2025 (order dated 17.01.2025) and MCRC No. 684/2025 (order dated 24.01.2025) and the case of the present applicants stands on identical footing thus, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 8. Let the applicants – Laxman Yadav, Vishram Yadav and Ram Bhajan Yadav, involved in Crime No. 94/2025 registered at Police Station- Bango, District- Korba (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 221, 296, 121(1), 132, 109 of BNS Act, be released on bail on their 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 applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without 5 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their 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 them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are deliberated or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal