1 2025:CGHC:57554 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7370 of 2025 1 - Pradeep Sahu S/o Siddhram Sahu Aged About 23 Years R/o Ashok Nagar, Near Water Tank, P.S. - Sarkanda, Distt. Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 2 - Siddhram Sahu S/o Late Dukalharam Sahu Aged About 50 Years R/o Ashok Nagar, Near Water Tank, P.S. - Sarkanda, Distt. Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Sarkanda, Distt. Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 26.11.2025 1. Applicant No. 2 Siddhram Sahu has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 16.10.2025. 2. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.11.27 10:44:33 +0530 2 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 1106/2025, registered at Police Station - Sarkanda District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 119, 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1) & 3(5) of the BNSS and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that on 14/08/2025 the complainant lodged an F.I.R. that while she was in front of her house, her husband's nephew Chintoo Sahu was sitting near Ashok Nagar Temple at the same time applicant no. 1 who also lives in the same street came there and demanded money from Chintoo for drinking liquor when Chintoo refused to give money, the applicant no. 1 started abusing him and when Chintoo sahu stopped him, the applicant no. 1 his brother Pramod Sahu, his father/applicant no. 2 and other persons assaulted him with fist and knife. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the present case, as the FIR has been lodged due to old enmity, and the alleged incident arose out of a minor quarrel between the victim Chintoo and neighborhood children, in which the applicant only intervened to resolve the dispute and did not assault the victim. There are material contradictions in the complainant’s statements as reflected in the impugned order, creating serious doubt about the prosecution story. The learned Court below has also failed to appreciate that the prosecution has miserably failed to establish the essential ingredients of the alleged offences under Sections 119, 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 3(5) of the BNSS and 3 Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. The applicant has never been of a threatening nature, and there is no possibility of tampering with witnesses if released on bail. The applicant has been in jail since 14.08.2025, therefore prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 7. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has no previous antecedents and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed and he has been in jail since 14.08.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 8. Let applicant, Pradeep Sahu, involved in Crime No. 1106/2025, registered at Police Station - Sarkanda District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 119, 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1) & 3(5) of the BNSS and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. , be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 4 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 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 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. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav