1 2025:CGHC:20708 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3004 of 2025 1 - Shashikumar @ Aryan S/o Babloo Das, Caste-Pan Aged About 22 Years R/o Bhatta Bazar Ward No. 25, Kehat, Tahsil- Block Purniya, District- Purniya (Bihar) 2 - Rajesh Kumar S/o Upendra Das Aged About 23 Years R/o Tatmatoli, Sudin Chowk, Police Station- Kehat, Tahsil- Block Purniya, District- Purniya (Bihar) 3 - Kuldeep Singh S/o Karan Singh Aged About 32 Years R/o Mohammadpur Gujar, Near Shiv Mandir, Police Station- Sohna, District- Gudgaon (Haryana) --- Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- City Kotwali, Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Respondent MCRC No. 3123 of 2025 1 - Neeshu Kumar S/o Dhaneshwar Das, Caste-Das Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village- Shivdham Tola, Ward No. 3, Near Muslim Kabristan Madhubani, Police Station- Kehat Tahsil- Block Purniya, District- Purniya (Bihar) (Correct P.S. Mentioned) GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.05.07 16:46:28 +0530 2 2 - Sawan Kumar S/o Sunil Kumar Poddar Aged About 24 Years R/o Tarapur, Ward No. 15, Police Station- Kehat Tahsil- Block Purniya, District Purniya (Bihar) (Correct P.S. Mentioned) 3 - Baikunth Kumar S/o Vinod Choudhari Aged About 26 Years R/o Vivekanand Colony, Police Station Kehat Tahsil- Block Purniya, District- Purniya (Bihar) (Correct P.S. Mentioned) --Applicants Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali, Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Respondent For Applicants : Shri Satya Prakash Verma and Ms. Ritika Verma, Advocates. For Respondent/State : Shri Malay Jain, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06/05/2025 1. Both these bail applications are decided by this common order as they are arising out of the same crime number. 2. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.102/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwalí, Balodabazar, District-Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 308(2), 308(6), 319(2), 351(4) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act. 3 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 16.01.2025, the complainant Loknath Dhruw, aged about 65 years resident of Balodabazar received an unknown phone call and one lady asked the complainant to open his cloths for playing sex game, upon which, the complainant opened his cloths. Thereafter the said lady threatened the complainant for uploading the obscene photograph in social media. After sometime, unknown persons called in the mobile number of complainant by personating themselves as police personnel and told the complainant that he has done obscene act with the girl and demanded money from the complainant, failing which, FIR would be registered against the complainant. Due to the said threatening, the complainant has paid Rs. 6,83,000/- for the period from 17.01.2025 to 22.01.2025 through Phone-Pay. Thereafter the said unknown persons demanded more money from the complainant, therefore the complainant made complaint before the Police Station City Kotwali, Balodabazar, upon which, the aforesaid offences were registered against unknown persons and during course of investigation, the present applicants have been arrested. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that the present applicants have neither given any threatening to the complainant, nor they have demanded or received any money from the complainant. He would further submit that the main accused persons have obtained the bank accounts of the applicants and linked the bank accounts in the mobile and they have misused the bank accounts and mobile numbers of the present applicants. He would further submit that the family members of present 4 applicants have returned the amount to the complainant and a compromise document has been executed between the family members of applicants and complainant. The copy of compromise document & affidavit are collectively annexed herewith as ANNEXURE A/2. He would submit that the charge sheet has already been filed, the applicants are in jail since 08.02.2025 and the trial will take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore the applicants may be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He would submit that there is no criminal antecedents against the applicants except applicant No.3 Kuldeep Singh in MCRC No.3004/2025 who has one criminal antecedent at Crime No.279/2017 at Police Station Kaithal, Haryana under section 420 IPC. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, considering the fact that family members of present applicants have returned the amount to the complainant and a compromise has been taken place between the family members of applicants and complainant, there is no criminal antecedents against the applicants except applicant No.3 Kuldeep Singh in MCRC No.3004/2025 who has one criminal antecedent bearing Crime No.279/2017 at Police Station Kaithal, Haryana under section 420 IPC, further case of applicants are distinguishable from the case of other co-accused persons, period of detention of the applicants since 5 08.02.2025, charge sheet has been filed and trial is likely to some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. 8. Let the applicant No.1 Shashikumar @ Aryan, applicant No.2 Rajesh Kumar & applicant No.3 Kuldeep Singh in MCRC No. 3004 of 2025 and applicant No.1 Neeshu Kumar, applicant No.2 Sawan Kumar and applicant No.3 Baikunth Kumar in MCRC No. 3123 of 2025 involved in Crime No.102/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwalí, Balodabazar, District-Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 308(2), 308(6), 319(2), 351(4) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act, be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under 6 Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law. 9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri