1 2025:CGHC:51145 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8183 of 2025 1 - Hirabai Sahu W/o Santosh Kumar Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o Gram Sursabandha P.S. Rajim, Distt- Gariyabandh Chhattisgarh. 2 - Godavari Sahu W/o Santram Sahu Aged About 38 Years R/o Gram Sursabandha P.S. Rajim, Distt- Gariyabandh Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Rajim, District- Gariyabandh Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 14/10/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 227/2025 registered at Police Station Rajim, District- Gariyabandh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 115(2), 351(3), 109 r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 26.07.2025 at around 9:30 P.M., the complainant S. Kumar Sahu was allegedly abused in filthy language and chased for assault by Durgesh Sahu, Naresh Sahu, Raghu Sahu, and Santram Sahu, who also vandalized and damaged his motorcycle. Later, in the early hours of 27.07.2025, when the complainant was returning home to Village Sursabandha along with his uncle Harishankar, brother Gautam, and cousin Karan Sahu, the accused persons Durgesh Sahu, Naresh Sahu, Heera Bai Sahu, and Godavari Sahu again confronted him near Sursabandha Bus Stand. They abused him using obscene language, threatened to kill him for lodging a police complaint, and attacked him and his uncle with stones, glass bottles, and iron rods. The complainant sustained injuries near his head and left ear, while his uncle suffered a serious head injury and was admitted to DKS Hospital, Raipur for treatment. On the basis of the complaint, an FIR bearing Crime No. 227/2025 was registered at Police Station Rajim for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 109, and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the accused persons. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that the true facts of the case are that the complainant and the applicant’s family are neighbors and have a long-standing land dispute. Several disputes have already taken place earlier, and multiple settlement agreements were 3 executed between them. On 26.07.2025, the applicant’s family member Durgesh Sahu had lodged a complaint at Police Station Rajim regarding damage caused to their under-construction house. Later that night, around 1:30 A.M., when the applicant and his brother were guarding the premises, some persons again attempted to damage the property. They retaliated and shouted, causing the trespassers to flee. While the applicant’s family was on their way to the police station to lodge an FIR, they were intercepted near the bus stand by the complainant’s family. It was then revealed that the persons who tried to damage the property were the complainant and his family, leading to a scuffle between both sides. The incident was reported and registered as Crime No. 228/2025. The applicants are in jail since 28.07.2025, the applicants have no criminal antecedents, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits present applicants along with other co-accused persons abused the complainant in obscene language, threatened to kill him, and jointly assaulted the complainant and his uncle using stones, glass bottles, and iron rods, on account of some property dispute, causing them injuries, due to which they have received injuries on their person, therefore, applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicants since 28.07.2025, the fact that though the applicants along with other co-accused persons allegedly assaulted the complainant and his uncle using stones, glass bottles, and iron rods, on account of some property dispute, causing them injuries, due to which they have received injuries on their person, but present applicants are mother of co-accused persons, who have assaulted the injured and his uncle using stones, glass bottles, and iron rods on account of some property dispute, the case of present applicants are distinguishable from that of the co-accused persons, who assaulted the injured and his uncle, further applicants have no criminal antecedents and charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Hirabai Sahu and Godavari Sahu, involved in Crime No. 227/2025 registered at Police Station Rajim, District- Gariyabandh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 109 r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties 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. 5 (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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail 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 Bharatiya 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 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 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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil