1 2025:CGHC:49853 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7889 of 2025 Sushil Yadav S/o Late Shri Balbhadra Yadav Aged About 46 Years Caste- Mahkul, R/o Village- Jorandajhariya, P.S. - Tumla, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus The State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Outpost- Kolhenjhariya, Police Station- Tumla, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate. Non-applicant/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 07.10.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 35/2025, registered at Police Outpost – Kolhenjhariya, Police Station Tumla, District Jashpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 117(2), 118(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story in short is that the complainant, Narendra Yadav, lodged a report at Police Station Tumla alleging that on 29.06.2025, while he was plowing his field with a tractor, the applicant reached the spot, ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.10.08 10:55:35 +0530 2 abused him and his father over an old land dispute, and prevented him from plowing the land. It is further alleged that the applicant bit and cut his little finger. Therefore, the written report was lodged, and after receiving the MLC report, non-bailable offences were added. The applicant was arrested on 03.07.2025, and after completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that due to an old land dispute, the applicant has been falsely implicated, even though, on the date of the incident, the complainant and his father were attempting to plough the applicant’s field, which was objected to by the applicant; hence, the dispute arose. He further submits that, considering the MLC report and the fact that no weapon was used by the applicant and the alleged injury was caused by teeth, the offences under Sections 117(3) and 118 of the BNS are not made out. He also submits that the applicant has four criminal antecedents under the IPC, out of which he has already been acquitted in one case, while the remaining cases are still pending. He further submits that the present applicant has been in jail since 03.07.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He further submits that, looking to the criminal antecedents of the applicant, he is not entitled to the grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and upon perusal of the case diary, it transpires that the incident took place due to a land dispute. On the date of the incident, the complainant and his father were attempting to plough the applicant’s field, which was objected to by the applicant, resulting in the dispute. It further appears that, as per the MLC report, no weapon was used by the applicant and the alleged injury was caused by teeth. It is also appeared that the applicant has four criminal antecedents under the IPC, out of which he has already been acquitted in one case, while the remaining cases are still pending. Moreover, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case, the applicant is in jail since 03.07.2025, conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the applicant – Sushil Yadav, involved in Crime No. 35/2025, registered at Police Outpost – Kolhenjhariya, Police Station Tumla, District Jashpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 117(2), 118(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya 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 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. 4 (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 his 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 his, 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 sufficient 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. Office 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 Abhishek