1 2025:CGHC:56329 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9215 of 2025 Ashok Sahu S/o Late Vedram Sahu Aged About 32 Years R/o Kathrimal, Baigapali, Police Station - Urga, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Station - Amanaka, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 19.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 328/2024, registered at Police Station Amanaka, District : Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 109 of BNS. AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that on 11.09.2024 the complainant, Prakash Sahu, lodged a report at Police Station Amanaka, Raipur stating that the accused Ashok Sahu had come with his wife Nirmala Sahu and their minor daughter seeking work, and was allowed to stay at the under-construction Housing Board building at Tati band. At about 1:30 PM, the site engineer informed the complainant that the accused was assaulting his wife by sitting on her chest and hitting her face with a brick. The labourers present at the site intervened and rescued her, following which she was shifted to AIIMS Hospital in a severely injured condition. On the basis of the report, Crime No. 328/2024 was registered under Section 109 of the BNS. During investigation, the accused was arrested on 12.09.2024 and a black fly-ash brick used in the assault was seized pursuant to his memorandum. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed and the case is presently under trial. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submit that the medical report does not support the prosecution story, as the injuries sustained by the alleged injured are simple in nature and not grievous. The injured person has been working in his normal routine, which itself indicates that no serious or grievous injuries were caused. Therefore, the ingredients of Section 109 of the B.N.S. are not made out against the present 3 applicant. He further submits that there exists prior dispute and enmity between the complainant and the accused, and the applicant has been falsely implicated due to such rivalry. The applicant has not committed any assault or wrongdoing as alleged, and the prosecution has not produced any prima facie evidence showing his involvement or any mens rea. It is submitted that even the co-accused persons have already been granted bail, which further indicates that the allegations are doubtful. He also submits that the police arrested the applicant merely on suspicion without conducting proper investigation, and without identifying the actual assailant. The FIR and the medical report do not support the prosecution version, yet the applicant has been in jail since 12.09.2024, causing grave hardship to his family. In absence of any cogent evidence, it cannot be said that the applicant committed the alleged offence, and continuation of his detention serves no purpose. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the allegation against the applicant is that he assaulted his wife by sitting on her chest and striking her face with a brick, causing serious injuries to the injured i.e. (i) Scalp hematoma over the left occipital and vertex region (ii) Displaced fracture of Bilateral lacrimal bones, Nasal bones, Nasal septum, and Anterior 4 aspect of the left superior alveolar process (upper jaw), (iii) Fracture of the right orbital wall, (iv) Fracture of the right medial wall, (v) Periorbital ecchymosis (blackening around both eyes), (vi) Subconjunctival hemorrhage and chemosis present in both eyes, which are found to be grievous in nature, therefore the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the fact that the applicant allegedly assaulted his wife by sitting on her chest and striking her face with a brick, causing serious injuries to the injured i.e.(i) Scalp hematoma over the left occipital and vertex region (ii) Displaced fracture of Bilateral lacrimal bones, Nasal bones, Nasal septum, and Anterior aspect of the left superior alveolar process (upper jaw), (iii) Fracture of the right orbital wall, (iv) Fracture of the right medial wall, (v) Periorbital ecchymosis (blackening around both eyes), (vi) Subconjunctival hemorrhage and chemosis present in both eyes, which are found to be grievous in nature, as such, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant-Ashok Sahu, involved in Crime No. 328/2024, registered at Police Station 5 Amanaka, District : Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 109 of BNS, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and concluded the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil