1 2025:CGHC:54171 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8809 of 2025 Surendra Shriwas S/o Mohan Shriwas Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Rogda, Nawagarh, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, P.S. Hardibazar, District- Korba (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Madhunisha Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06.11.2025 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. 160/2025 registered at Police Station Hardibazar, District Korba (C.G.) offence under Sections 115(2), 296, 351(3), 118(2), 3(5) and 191(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, on 01.09.2025 at about 5:00 PM, the complainant, Shyam Prasad Bhardwaj, resident of Village Andi Kachar, P.S. Hardibazar, District Korba, was near the village pond when the applicant, along with four other co-accused persons, obstructed his way ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.11.07 14:48:06 +0530 2 while he was proceeding with preparations for Ganesh Visarjan. When the complainant asked them to give way, they allegedly abused him in filthy language, threatened to kill him, and assaulted him and Aniket Bhardwaj with fists and blows. Upon receiving information, the complainant’s father, Brijram Bhardwaj, who is physically weak and walks with the aid of a stick, reached the spot. The accused persons again abused and assaulted him. It is alleged that accused Jagdish Srivas snatched his wooden stick and struck him on the head repeatedly, causing grievous injuries, which were confirmed by medical examination and CT scan reports. During the course of investigation, the wooden stick was seized, medical opinions confirmed the nature of the injuries, and sufÏcient evidence was found against the accused persons. Accordingly, offences under Sections 118(2), 191(2), 296, 3(5), 115(2), and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) were registered. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. She submits that, due to a long-standing personal dispute between the parties belonging to the same village, the applicant has been wrongly made an accused. She further submits that the allegations leveled against the applicants are exaggerated and omnibus in nature, without any specific overt act attributed to either of them. It is also contended that the role of the present applicant is neither major nor active in nature. No specific allegation of assault or of causing grievous injury has been made against the applicant in the entire prosecution story. It is further submitted that the genesis of the incident has been deliberately suppressed by the complainant. In fact, it was co-accused Sanju Shrivas who had first lodged FIR No. 159/2025 regarding the same incident at Police Station Hardibazar. This clearly indicates that the present FIR (Crime No. 3 160/2025) is nothing but a counterblast to the earlier report filed by Sanju Shrivas, intended to falsely implicate the applicants and their family members. She also submits that the present incident arose out of a sudden quarrel near the village pond, without any premeditation. The applicant and other co-accused were on their way to make preparations for Ganesh Visarjan when the complainant party obstructed their movement, leading to a mutual scufÒe. The applicant acted only in exercise of the right of private defence to protect himself and his family members from the aggression of the complainant side. It is further submitted that the CT Scan report of the alleged injured, Brijram Bhardwaj, dated 08.09.2025, does not reveal any evidence of recent traumatic injury. The findings of small vessel infarcts and mild cortico- cerebral atrophy are purely of natural and degenerative origin and not caused by any external force or assault. This clearly falsifies the prosecution’s claim that a grievous head injury was inflicted by the applicant or co-accused. Hence, the allegation of an offence under Section 191(2) BNS (grievous hurt) is prima facie not substantiated by medical evidence. She further submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and he has been in judicial custody since 03.10.2025. As the conclusion of the trial may take some time, she prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the case diary of the present case is not available. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, wherein a counter FIR has been lodged between the parties and both sides have sustained 4 simple injuries, moreover, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court which is taken on record and the applicant has been in jail since 03.10.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Surendra Shriwas, involved in Crime No. 160/2025 registered at Police Station Hardibazar, District Korba (C.G.) offence under Sections 115(2), 296, 351(3), 118(2), 3(5) and 191(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing personal 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 5 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 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek