1 2025:CGHC:50094 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7934 of 2025 Anshu Kumar Sonwani S/o- Late Sarveshwari Sonwani Aged About 20 Years R/o Village- Sardih, P.S. And Tahsil- Bagicha, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O. P.S.- Bagicha, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For applicant : Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.10.2025 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 they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 118/2025, registered at Police Station- Bagicha, District- Jashpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 118(2), 191(2), 192, 331(6) of B.N.S. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant, Manpyari Khalkho, lodged a written report alleging that on 21.05.2025 at KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 about 01:30 a.m., her son, Shivam Panna, had gone to the house of Ramesh Panna to attend a marriage ceremony. During the celebration and dancing, dust was blowing, due to which her son sprayed water. On account of this, a dispute arose, and the accused persons threatened them. It is further alleged that the applicant, along with the other co-accused, used filthy language against them and thereafter, with common intention, committed violence upon them. It is also alleged that the accused persons entered the complainant's house, assaulted them, and further poured boiling water upon the complainant and her children. On the basis of the said report, an FIR was lodged against the applicant along with co-accused for the offences under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 118(2), 191(2), 192, and 331(6) of the BNS. After investigation, the applicant/accused was arrested on 22.05.2025 and has been in jail since then. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submit that the applicant never committed any crime which is alleged against him in fact on the date of incident, applicant was present there and attending the marriage ceremony and in the night Shivam Khalkho, the son of complainant having some dispute with one of co-accused and then Shivam Khalkho became aggressor and assaulted to co-accused and further brought hot water from his house and tried to poured upon co-accused and the applicant along with co-accused tried to pacify them but later on applicant has also been implicated in false case even though he never cause any injury to complainant or anyone. He further submits that similar situated co-accused have 3 been granted bail by Court in MCRC/6378/2025, vide order dated 11.09.2025 and MCRC No. 7882/2025, vide order dated 07.10.2025 and the case of the applicant is almost similar to that co-accused. Accordingly, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. It is submitted that there are in total seven accused persons, including the present applicant, who, in furtherance of their common intention, have entered into the house of the complainant and committed assault upon the complainant and her family members, even going to the extent of pouring boiling water upon them. The medical report reveals that two of the injured persons have sustained grievous injuries, while one has sustained simple injury, clearly indicating the brutal nature of the assault. She further contends that the offence under Sections 118(2) and 331(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita are of serious nature and carry severe punishment, and the manner in which the incident was executed reflects premeditation and intention to cause bodily harm. It is further argued that granting bail to the applicant at this stage may adversely affect the investigation and the trial, as there is every possibility of tampering with evidence and influencing the witnesses. Therefore, she prays for rejection of the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, 4 nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the similar situated co-accused persons namely, Manoranjan Kerketta, Mahajan Kerketta and Ramjane Baghel have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 6378/2025, vide order dated 11.09.2025 and MCRC No. 7882/2025, vide order dated 07.10.2025 and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 22.05.2025 and the applicant has no criminal antecedent and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant on parity. 7. Let applicant, Anshu Kumar Sonwani, involved in Crime No. 118/2025, registered at Police Station- Bagicha, District- Jashpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 118(2), 191(2), 192, 331(6) of B.N.S, 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 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. (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 5 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. 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 Kunal