1 2025:CGHC:58953 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9942 of 2025 Devi Sahu S/o Shri Ramesh Sahu Aged About 20 Years R/o Village- Pendri, Atal Awas, Ward No. 14, Police Station- Lalbag, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Kotwali, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Patel , Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 04.12.2025 1. This the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.263/2025 registered at Police Station - Kotwali District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 309(4), 109, 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that, on 29.05.2025, the complainant VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.12.05 12:06:27 +0530 2 Khileshwar Sahu filed a report stating that on 28.05.2025 at around 12:30 AM, he was sitting in a truck near Bhadoria chowk when 4 men came, took away his vivo mobile phone and stabbed him in the stomach. Based on this complaint, Crime no. 263/2025 under Section 309(4) 3(5) of BNS was registered and investigation was carried out and applicant was arrested. 3. The applicant submits that he is innocent and has not committed any offence. He further submits that the applicant has been charged merely on the basis of suspicion, and there is no involvement of the applicant in the alleged crime. The applicant was arrested on 30.05.2025, and his prolonged detention will cause severe financial hardship to his family members, who are entirely dependent on him. It is further submitted that the applicant has not been named in the FIR lodged by the complainant, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure A/2. The applicant is in judicial custody since 30.05.2025, and the investigation as well as the trial is likely to take considerable time for conclusion. It is well settled that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, and the continued detention of the applicant due to delay in trial would amount to a violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, where his movable and immovable properties are situated, and there is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is ready and willing to furnish adequate surety and undertakes to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. 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, and the fact that the co-accused, Pawan Sonwani, has already been granted bail vide order dated 07.11.2025 in MCRC No. 8906 of 2025, and further considering that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and he has been in jail since 30.05.2025, and as the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bai. 7. Let the Applicant – Devi Sahu, involved in Crime No.263/2025 registered at Police Station - Kotwali District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 309(4), 109, 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on 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 they 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 4 their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail 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 deliberate or without sufficient 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. Office 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 vaibhav