1 2025:CGHC:50106 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7908 of 2025 Deepak Mahobia S/o Late Shriramkrishna Mahobia Aged About 40 Years Permanent R/o Tamerpara, Durg District- Durg (C.G.) At Present R/o Chandani Chowk Sonar Para, Police Station Kotwali Tahsil And District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Of The Police Station Jutemill, Tahsil And District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Abhishek Saraf, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.10.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 281/2025 registered at Police Station : Jutemill, Tehsil and District Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 319(2), 324(3), 324(5), 351(4), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3 and 5 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 18.08.2025, a First Information Report was lodged by the complainant, Belar Singh Sanwra, at Police ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.10.08 20:11:50 +0530 2 Station Jutemill, Raigarh, alleging that on 17.08.2025, the present applicant along with three others was involved in damaging a Government Anganwadi Building situated at Sant Vinobha Nagar, Raigarh, by using a JCB machine. When questioned by the complainant, they allegedly threatened him, stating that they had connections with the Chief Minister and that no action could be taken against them. On the basis of the said complaint, offences under Sections 319(2), 324(3), 324(5), 351(4), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 3 and 5 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, have been registered against the applicant and three others. The said offences are triable by the Magistrate, and the maximum punishment prescribed is up to five years. The charge-sheet in the case has already been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the fact of the matter is that in Revenue Case No. 202506040300006/A- 70/2023-24, titled Rambai and Others vs. Officer-in-Charge, Women and Child Development and Others, the application form, demarcation report, eviction warrant, and statements of witnesses clearly establish that the demolition of the alleged Anganwadi Centre was carried out pursuant to an order of demolition issued by the Tehsildar, Raigarh. The said demolition was executed by the Mal Jamadar in accordance with the eviction order. These documents form part of the charge-sheet. He also submits that the alleged incident is stated to have occurred on 17.08.2025. On the very same day, the applicant/accused was arrested by the Jute Mill Police under Section 170 of the IPC and Section 151 of the CrPC, and was sent to jail. After his release, he was again arrested on 23.08.2025 in connection with the present case. It is pertinent to 3 mention that, if any offence is at all made out in this case, the only person responsible for the same would be the Tehsildar, Raigarh, who has already been placed under suspension in connection with the said allegations. He further submits that the offences under Sections 391(2), 324(3), 324(5), 351(4), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 3 and 5 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, are not at all attracted against the present applicant. He also submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 23.08.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of offence and further the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant has been in jail since 23.08.2025 and the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Deepak Mahobia, involved in Crime No. 281/2025 registered at Police Station : Jutemill, Tehsil and District Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 319(2), 324(3), 324(5), 351(4), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3 and 5 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, be released on bail 4 on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount 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 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. 5 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 Abhishek