1 2025:CGHC:59623 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9990 of 2025 1 - Uday Sharma S/o Girdhari Sharma Aged About 21 Years R/o Kadambari Nagar, Quarter No.137, P.S. Mohan Nagar, District- Durg C.G. 2 - Girdhari Sharma S/o Late Soorajmal Sharma Aged About 47 Years R/o Kadambari Nagar, Quarter No.137, P.S. Mohan Nagar, District- Durg C.G. ...Applicants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Ps Mohan Nagar, District- Durg C.G. ... Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Kishore Bhaduri, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Poulami Das, Advocate and Mr. Sabyasachi Bhaduri, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Satish Gupta, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 09.12.2025 1. Applicants have filed this second bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 223/2025 registered at ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.12.10 11:22:27 +0530 2 Police Station – Mohannagar, District- Durg, (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 103(1), 115(2), 296, 3(5), 351(3) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. First Bail Application of the applicants was withdrawn vide order dated 08.09.2025 in MCRC No. 7109 of 2025. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that on 26.05.2025 at about 11:30 AM deceased Ankit Sharma along with his brother Ketan Sharma was in his workplace- Motor Body Balaji Workship situated at Transport Nagar, Dhamdha Naka Road and were engaged in doing their work. At the relevant point of time, uncle of deceased Ankit Sharma i.e. applicant no. 2 Girdhari Sharma along with his son applicant no. 1 Uday Sharma came in work shop and started quarreling with them due to some motor garage work. Thereafter, they also stared abusing in filthy language and started assaulting by hands and fists and also by steel pipe and iron angle. In the aforementioned assault, Ketan Sharma and deceased Ankit Sharma suffered injuries and were taken to hospital. Ankit Sharma suffered grievous injuries and died to injuries suffered by him on the same date. Incident was reported based upon which aforementioned crime was registered and applicants were arrested. 3. Learned senior counsel for applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the crime, they have not committed offence as alleged. He further submits that deceased Ankit Sharma and his brother Ketan Sharma were aggressor and in defense, deceased might have suffered injuries. He also submits that after arrest of applicants charge- sheet was filed on26.09.2025, however, till date none of the prosecution witnesses have been examined and, therefore, also looking to period of detention of applicants, they may be enlarged on bail. Referring to 3 postmortem report, it is argued that there is no specific opinion of doctor that death of Ankit Sharma is homicidal in nature. He lastly submits that looking to injuries it may not be possible for both the applicants to have assaulted deceased on his head and, therefore, in the facts of the case, if at all, the liability is to be fixed for causing grievous assault, it can be only upon one applicant i.e. either the father or son. He also submits that applicants are only male members of family, both of them are behind the bars due to which entire business of work shop is stalled. There is no other earning member of the family and therefore, one of the applicant be released on bail. In support of his contention that considering period of pre-trial detention of applicants, they may be enlarged on bail, he places reliance upon the judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Subhelal @ Sushil Sahu Vrs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in 2025 INSC 242 in Criminal Appeal no. 818 of 2025. However he fairly submits that consideration of Hon’ble Supreme Court in this matter is to the provision under Section 437(6) of the CrPC. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned senior counsel for applicants and would submit that the incident took place in broad day light at about 11:30 am in the morning and it is applicants who came to work shop of deceased while the deceased along with his brother was engaged in doing some work of the workshop. Applicants started quarreling with deceased and his brother and, therefore, applicants are aggressor. He also submits that there are as many as six eye-witnesses to the crime namely Surendra Jagid, Jitesh Kumar Jagid, Afroz Ansari, Gursimran Singh, Jitendra 4 Dewangan and Ketan Sharma(injured brother of deceased) . He lastly submits that police during course of investigation has seized CCTV footage of the place of incident. He submits that eye-witnesses have made their statement before concerned police stating that both applicants were armed with steel pipe and iron angle and cause of death of deceased according to postmortem report is head injury and shock. Hence they may not be enlarged on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents enclosed along with the bail application. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation and submission made by learned counsel for respective parties as also there are as many as six eye-witnesses to the case, I do not find present to be a fit case to allow the application, accordingly, application is dismissed. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) alfiza JUDGE