1 2025:CGHC:53929 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8794 of 2025 1 - Jashesh Chauhan S/o Balbhadra Chauhan Aged About 45 Years R/o Chauhan Para, Sarangarh, District- Sarangarh - Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Sarangarh, District- Raigarh (Now District - Sarangarh - Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Satish Gupta, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 04.11.2025 1. Applicant has filed this second bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “ BNSS”) for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 219 of 2021 registered at Police Station – Sarangarh,District- Raigarh (now District- Sarangarh- Bilaigarh) (CG) for offence punishable under Sections 294,506 Part – 2 and 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. First bail application of present applicant was withdrawn vide order dated 14.07.2025 in MCRC No. 5230 of 2025. 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 15.04.2021 at about 8:00 PM, after hearing some noise of quarrel, complainant came out from his house and saw that Mukesh Chouhan along with applicant, Tarachand and others on the ground of consumption of liquor where abusing Vinay Chauhan. Applicant caused injury to Vinay Chauhan by means of knife. Other accused persons Mukesh and Tarachand have assaulted by means of club, hands and fists. Based on the complaint, aforementioned crime was registered against the present applicant and he was arrested on 25.05.2021. 3. Learned counsel for applicant would submit that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that present bail application has been filed on the ground of delay of trial. Applicant is in jail since the date of his arrest i.e. 25.05.2021 and he has completed more than four years pre-trial detention. He also submits that there are as many as 18 witnesses in present case and till now only 05 have been examined and since then no other prosecution witness has been examined and trial is likely to take some considerable time to conclude. He also pointed out that other two co-accused persons namely Mukesh Chouhan and Sheetal Chouhan have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 14.12.2021 and 15.07.2022 in MCRC No. 7284 of 2021 and MCRC No. 3747 of 2022 respectively, hence, applicant may also be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for applicant and would submit that allegations for assault by a sharp weapon is against the present applicant. He also pointed out that there are as many as five criminal cases registered against the applicant out of which four are istigasha and one is registered under the Arms Act. However on asking he fairly submits that out of 18 prosecution witnesses only 05 have been examined till now. 5.I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents placed along with this bail application. 6. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission made by learned counsel for the respective parties, period of pre-trial detention, and further considering the fact that trial may 3 take some considerable time as out of 18 witnesses only 05 have been examined till now and also that applicant is languishing in jail since 25.05.2021 while other two co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to allow the application. 7.Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) 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. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) 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. (d) 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 4 default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) alfiza JUDGE ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.11.04 16:51:49 +0530