1 / 5 2025:CGHC:58175 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2409 of 2025 Shyam Bihari S/o Shri Jageshwar Sao Aged About 50 Years R/o. Village Saagobandh, Police Station Babhni Distt. Sonbhadra U.P. ... Appellant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P/S Sanaval Distt.- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Ajay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For State /Respondent : Mr. Ajit Singh, GA along with Ms. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer For Complainant : Mr. Sunil Tripathi, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 01/12/2025 1. The instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 10/09/2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur Place Ramanujganj, C.G. in Bail Application No.491/2025 whereby the application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. of the appellant has been rejected. ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.12.05 11:12:59 +0530 2 / 5 2. The appellant has preferred this appeal for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.46/2025 registered in Police Station Sanwal, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. for offence punishable under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 296, 351(2), 115(2), 109(1) of BNS 2023 and under Sections 3 (1) (R) (S) (G) & 3 (2-5) of the SC ST Act. 3. As per the prosecution case, the victim/complainant Ramsai Gond, lodged a report alleging that on 11/08/2025 at about 9 AM the complainant was doing the cultivation work in the agricultural field at that time the accused persons more than 20 in number came armed with club, axe, stick and restrained the complainant from doing work and hurled filthy abuses and assaulted him and stated that the field belong to them and also threatened to kill him. Thereafter, on the basis of the same an FIR was registered and the appellant was arrested. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant is not named in the FIR. He would next contend that the name of the present appellant has been mentioned by the complainant only on the instructions of the villagers whereas the fact is that the appellant was not present in the spot. He would next contend that there is no direct allegation against the present appellant. He would lastly contend that the appellant is in jail since 22/08/2025 and the trial will take some more time, therefore, the appellant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail, however, they do not dispute the fact that the present appellant was not 3 / 5 present on the spot at the time of incident has not participated in the assault. 6. Learned counsel for the complainant opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. 8. Considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case and the role played by the appellant as he was not present on the spot at the time of incident further his name was not present in the FIR and the allegation on the present appellant is with regard to drop and take the other co- accused persons, therefore, there is no direct involvement of the present appellant. Thus, considering the same as well as the detention period of the appellant as he is lodged in jail since 22/08/2025, this Court is of the opinion that since it will take time to conclude the trial, therefore, looking to the entire facts & circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the appellant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set-aside. 10. Let appellant Shyam Bihari, involved in Crime No.46/2025 registered in Police Station Sanawal, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. for offence punishable under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 296, 351(2), 115(2), 109(1) of BNS 2023 and under Sections 3 (1) (R) (S) (G) & 3 (2-5) of the SC ST Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with one local surety in like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 / 5 (i) The appellant 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 appellant shall remain present before the trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial Court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. (iii) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS, 2023 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 Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. (iv) The appellant 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 2023. If in the opinion of the trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial Court to treat such 5 / 5 default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 11. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu