-1- 2025:CGHC:51224 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8181 of 2025 Budhiyar Sai S/o Shanichar Ekka Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Sonajori, Naya Bardrha P.S. And Tahsil - Lailunga District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant (s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In-Charge Police Station Lailunga, Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Advocate For State : Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Dy. A.G. S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 14/10/2025 1. Applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of regular bail as he was arrested in connection with Crime No.108 of 2021 registered at Police Station- Lailunga, District- Raigarh(CG) for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2025.10.15 10:22:15 +0530 -2- 2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 03.04.2021 at about 4:30 pm, applicant assaulted his wife by sharp edged weapon in the house due to which she died. Incident was reported to concerned police station and during course of investigation, aforementioned crime was registered against applicant. 3. This is the third bail application of the applicant. His earlier application was dismissed on merit. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that while dismissing second bail application on merit, this Court took cognizance of statements of witnesses Pratap Ekka and Pramod Ekka recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. who are sons of applicant and present in the house at the time of incident. It is contention of learned counsel for applicant that now both the aforementioned witnesses have been examined before the trial Court as PW-12 and PW1-3 and they have not supported case of prosecution. Apart from aforementioned two witnesses, other witnesses who have been examined before trial Court till 05.06.2025 have also not supported case of prosecution. He lastly contended that remaining witnesses are the witnesses to investigation proceedings. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes submission of learned counsel for the applicant. He submits that according to statements available in charge sheet, Pratap Ekka and Pramod Ekka were the material witnesses who were -3- outside the room where incident took place. Deposition of witnesses which is enclosed along with this bail application and relied upon by learned counsel for appellant in his submission is subject matter of appreciation by trial Court. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel for the respective parties, date of detention of applicant since 04.04.2021, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to allow the application. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail on his furnishing a personal bail bond in the sum of Rs.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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under -4- 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 default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.” 9. 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) Judge Praveen