1 2025:CGHC:55057 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9046 of 2025 1 - Hirendra Sahu S/o Shri Tukaram Sahu Aged About 26 Years R/o Near Shitla Talab Urla Ps Urla Distt. Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO Urla PS Urla District Raipur (C.G.) ---Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate For-Non-applicant : Mr. Pragya Shrivastava Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 12/11/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. in connection with Crime No. 116/2025, registered at Police Station Urla District Raipur, Chhattisgarh for the o2ences punishable under Sections 103(1) of BNS 2023 and 25 & 27(3) Arms Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, on 09.06.25 at night between approximately 3:30 and 4:00 AM, the deceased, Doman Bachhor, Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.11.13 10:45:34 +0530 2 entered the house of the applicant/accused, Hirendra Sahu, resident of Sarora, by climbing over the wall. He then started knocking on the door of Hirendra Sahu's room and verbally abusing him. Later, Doman Bachhor went up to the roof and started knocking on the door of his worker, Jag Bariha's room. Then Hirendra Sahu called 112 to report the incident. Subsequently, the accused, Virendra Sahu, went up to the roof carrying a sharp, knife-like iron weapon. When the deceased, Doman Bachhor, came towards Hirendra Sahu holding a wooden plank used for washing clothes, Hirendra Sahu grabbed him. Then, with the intention of killing Doman Bachhor, Hirendra Sahu repeatedly inAicted fatal blows on his head, shoulder, back, and several other places with the iron weapon he was carrying. He also hit Doman Bachhor's hands and feet with the wooden plank. As a result, the deceased Doman Bachhor sustained serious injuries. The deceased jumped o2 the roof and ran away, but fell down some distance away. After some time, Constable Akhilesh Mishra and vehicle driver Dilip Sahu, who were deployed with Dial 112, arrived there. Passersby informed them that a person was lying on the road some distance away in a seriously injured and bleeding condition. Both of them went there to see, and Hirendra Sahu also went there. Upon questioning Hirendra Sahu, he confessed to killing this person, Doman Bachhor, with the sharp weapon he was carrying. Subsequently, Constable Akhilesh Mishra called the injured person's mother, Mrs. Seema Bachhor, and Akash Netam. They took Doman Bachhor to AIIMS hospital for treatment. At AIIMS hospital, the doctor examined him and declared him brought dead. Based on this, an unregistered death intimation report number 0/157/25 under section 194 of the BNSS was registered at Aamanaka Police Station. Subsequently, an inquest was conducted on the 3 deceased's body in the presence of witnesses. A post-mortem examination was performed. In the case, Sub-Inspector J.D. Diwan, along with a scientiDc oEcer from the Forensic Department, inspected the crime scene. Physical evidence, including blood-stained gravel and plain gravel, a wooden washing board belonging to the deceased, and the deceased's Maestro vehicle bearing registration number CG 04 X 7257, were seized. A sketch map of the crime scene was prepared. On June 9, 2025, case number 55/25 under Section 194 BNSS was registered. Subsequently, crime number 116/25 under Section 103(1) BNS was registered against the accused, Hirendra Sahu. The accused, Hirendra Sahu, was taken into custody and interrogated, during which he confessed to his crime. A memorandum was recorded on June 10, 2025, in the presence of witnesses under Section 23(2) BNS. Based on the accused's memorandum, a sharp, dagger-like coconut cutting weapon used in the crime was recovered and seized in the presence of witnesses. Finding suEcient evidence against the accused, he was formally arrested at 2:40 PM on June 10, 2025, and sent to judicial custody. 3. It was argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant, Hirendra Sahu, has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident occurred suddenly and without premeditation when the deceased, Doman Bachhor, unlawfully entered the applicant’s house at around 3:30 to 4:00 A.M., abused him, and attempted to assault him with a wooden plank. The applicant, apprehending danger to his life and property, acted in self-defence, which unfortunately resulted in the deceased sustaining injuries. The applicant immediately informed the police by calling Dial 112, did not abscond, and fully cooperated during 4 investigation. The alleged weapon was recovered at his instance, and he has been in judicial custody since 10.06.2025. Investigation is complete and no further custodial interrogation is required. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with evidence. Hence, considering the nature of allegations and the circumstances of the case, the applicant prays that he may be released on in the interest of justice. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the o2ence alleged against the applicant, Hirendra Sahu, is serious in nature, being punishable under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The investigation clearly reveals that the applicant assaulted the deceased, Doman Bachhor, with a sharp iron weapon, causing multiple fatal injuries leading to his death. The recovery of the weapon at the instance of the applicant and the post- mortem Dndings corroborate the prosecution version. The plea of self- defence is not supported by the nature or gravity of the injuries, which indicate a deliberate and excessive assault. Considering the seriousness of the o2ence and the strong prima facie evidence against the applicant, this is not a Dt case for grant of bail. Hence, it is humbly prayed that the bail application of the accused be rejected in the interest of justice.. 5. I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case particularly the fact that the incident occurred in the heat of the moment following the unlawful entry of the deceased into the applicant’s house at odd hours, and that the applicant himself had informed the police by calling Dial 112, it appears that the act was not intentional but a result of sudden 5 provocation and self-defence and considering that the applicant has remained cooperative during investigation, has no criminal antecedents, and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with evidence and the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion and the applicant is in jail since 10.06.2025, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall le an undertaking to the eect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates xed 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 xed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without su$cient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sahita, 2023 (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS 2023. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date xed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sahita, 2023 (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates xed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS 2023 If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without su$cient 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. 8. OEce is directed to send a certiDed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti