1 2025:CGHC:42472 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6003 of 2025 Chudhamani Sahu S/o Tejram Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Vill- Rahud, P.S. Ranchirai, Dist. Balod, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer (S.H.O.) P.S.- Ranchirai, District- Balod, C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ravi Kumar Kashyap, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Swajeet Singh Ubeja, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.08.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 27/2025, registered at Police Station : Ranchirai, District- Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2) and 333 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 13.03.2025, on the occasion of Holika Dahan, the accused was allegedly found in RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 possession of a sword and is said to have threatened and abused the complainant. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the allegations are an afterthought and have been concocted, it is submitted that on the occasion of Holi, the complainant, Thaneshwar Sinha, was preparing to light Holi when the applicant allegedly arrived, accused the complainant of having filed a case against him, used obscene language, caught hold of the complainant’s collar, and struck him on the right cheek. It is further submitted that thereafter the complainant went home along with his wife. After some time, upon hearing loud abuses, the complainant’s wife came out, whereupon the accused allegedly drew a sword, continued to use obscene language, pushed open the gate of the house’s courtyard, entered the premises, and allegedly threatened to kill the complainant. It is also submitted that, in fact, there is a long-standing dispute between the complainant and the applicant, and taking advantage of the said dispute, the complainant, by misusing his political influence, has lodged false and fabricated reports against the applicant with the intention of escalating the matter and implicating him on baseless grounds. He further submits that the applicant has 04 criminal antecedents under the IPC, out of which, 01 case is disposed of and 03 cases are pending and he is in jail since 26.06.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays grant of bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He further submits that the accused was allegedly found in possession of a sword and is said to have threatened and abused the complainant. He also submits that the present applicant has 04 criminal antecedents under the similar nature, which shows that the present applicant is habitual offender, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that no injury has been caused to any person in the alleged incident and further fact that though the applicant has 04 criminal antecedents, out of which 01 has already been disposed of and 03 are still pending, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 26.06.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the matter, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. 7. Let the applicant, Chudhamani Sahu, involved in Crime No. 27/2025, registered at Police Station : Ranchirai, District- Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2) and 333 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal 4 bond with two sureties in the like sum 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 sufÏcient 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 5 deliberate or without sufÏcient 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. 8. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan