1 2025:CGHC:59488 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10036 of 2025 Kuleshwar Sahu S/o Nar Singh Sahu Aged About 34 Years R/o Kurdi P.S.- Arjunda, Dist.- Balod C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Balod, Through P.S.- Arjunda, District- Balod C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sumit Singh, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.12.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 146/2025 registered at Police Station Arjunda, District- Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 221, 121(1), 127(2), 132, 190, 191(2), 192, 296, 324(4) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 3(d) of Prevention of damage to public property Act, 1984. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 23.10.2025, between 20:30 to 21:00 hours, a crowd of villagers had gathered outside the RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 house of the accused, who had allegedly assaulted three persons with a sickle. The mob was reportedly creating a ruckus, shouting, “take them out, we will kill them.” When the police force and the cyber team reached the spot, the mob became violent, started abusing the ofÏcers, and vandalized the on-duty police vehicles, during which Constable Akash Soni sustained injuries. On the basis of these allegations, a report was lodged against the applicants and other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that similarly situated total 11 co- accused, namely, Deva @ Dewvrat Sahu, Ishwar Lal Bhandari, Heera Lal Sahu, David Kumar Sahu, Parmeshwar Dewangan, Man Singh Dewangan, Pomesh Kumar, Mukesh Nath Yogi, Lukeshwar Kumar, Tukesh Nishad and Pritam Thakur have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 24.11.2025 in MCRCA No. 1842/2025. He also submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 11.11.2025, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has not been filed yet in the present case. She also submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. It is submitted that on the date of incident, the applicant, along with other co-accused persons, were 3 part of a violent mob that created a law-and-order situation, vandalized police vehicles, obstructed public servants in discharge of their ofÏcial duties, and caused injuries to Constable Akash Soni. The conduct of the mob was aggressive, as they were instigating violence by shouting threats to kill the accused persons inside the house. It is further submitted that the investigation reveals active participation of the present applicant in the mob violence, and releasing them on bail may adversely affect the ongoing investigation and peace in the locality. Hence, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 11.11.2025, the fact that though the charge-sheet has not been submitted yet and the applicant is alleged to have been active member of this violent mob and were involved in obstructing police duty and damaging government property, but total 11 co-accused, namely, Deva @ Dewvrat Sahu, Ishwar Lal Bhandari, Heera Lal Sahu, David Kumar Sahu, Parmeshwar Dewangan, Man Singh Dewangan, Pomesh Kumar, Mukesh Nath Yogi, Lukeshwar Kumar, Tukesh Nishad and Pritam Thakur have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 24.11.2025 in MCRCA No. 1842/2025, and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused persons, further the applicant has 4 no criminal antecedent, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant- Kuleshwar Sahu, involved in Crime No. 146/2025 registered at Police Station Arjunda, District- Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 221, 121(1), 127(2), 132, 190, 191(2), 192, 296, 324(4) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 3(d) of Prevention of damage to public property Act, 1984, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 5 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 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 Rahul Dewangan