1 2025:CGHC:61064 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10357 of 2025 Namita Sarkar W/o Ganesh Sarkar Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Tambeshwarnagar, P.S. Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer-Police Station- Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Astha Patel, Advocate on behalf of Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.12.2025 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. 145/2025 registered at Police Station – Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 324(2), 109 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, the parties are neighbours and have a long history of mutual enmity. A previous revenue case and a criminal case ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.12.16 12:14:08 +0530 2 are already pending against the applicants at the instance of the complainant. Due to this background, tensions have persisted between both families. On 19.08.2025, the complainant, Mamta Sarkar, lodged an FIR alleging that the applicants abused her, damaged her mobile phone, and assaulted her and her family members. The applicant has also lodged a counter-FIR, being Crime No. 146/2025, against the complainant side arising out of the same incident. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. She submits that the applicant has also filed a counter-FIR in Crime No. 146/2025 under Sections 115(2), 296, 3(5), and 351(3) of the B.N.S. against the complainant side, arising out of the same incident, which clearly shows that there was a mutual fight and that both sides sustained injuries. She further submits that the parties have a subsisting land dispute, and the applicant’s husband and a co-accused in the present case had preferred an appeal which was allowed by the Sub-Divisional OfÏcer (Civil), Ramanujganj, vide order dated 23.12.2022. The present criminal proceedings are a fallout of the said dispute and have been instituted with the intent to exert undue pressure upon the applicant. The FIR attributes the alleged assault by a weapon only to co-accused Ganesh Sarkar, and the applicant has no role in causing any injury. The allegation against the present applicant is limited to a simple scufÒe, not involving any weapon or grievous injury. She submits that the present applicant has in jail since 11.10.2025, 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 of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court in the present case. He further 3 submits that the allegation against the applicant is that the present applicant abused the complainant due to previous enmity, whereas the husband of the present applicant, namely Ganesh Sarkar, assaulted the husband of the complainant with an iron hammer on his head, as a result of which he sustained grievous head injuries. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of regular bail in the present case. 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 and the allegation against the applicant is that the present applicant abused the complainant due to previous enmity, whereas the husband of the present applicant, namely Ganesh Sarkar, assaulted the husband of the complainant with an iron hammer on his head, as a result of which he sustained grievous head injuries, the case of the applicant is distinguished from the case of the co-accused, namely, Ganesh Sarkar. Furthermore, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court and she is in jail since 11.10.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some 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 – Namita Sarkar, involved in Crime No. 145/2025 registered at Police Station – Ramanujganj, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 324(2), 109 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for 4 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, 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 her 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