1 2025:CGHC:5617 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 827 of 2025 Shailendra Chhura @ Montu S/o Shri Dashmukh Chhura Aged About 25 Years R/o Bhavna Nagar, Block No. 08/125, P.S. Khamhardih, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S Telibandha, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 30.01.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 590/2024, registered at Police Station Telibandha, District : Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 109 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act. 2. The prosecution’s case, in brief, is that on 13.09.2024, a Dehati Nalishi was lodged by the victim, Sagar Banjare, stating that on 12.09.2024, at around 5:00 PM, while he was working at Country RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.02.03 10:58:13 +0530 2 Bar (Ahata), Labhandih, Raipur, a fight broke out between a few persons in front of his workplace. When he attempted to intervene, the applicant pulled out a knife from his pocket and assaulted him. Based on his report, an offense under Section 109 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act was registered and during the investigation, the present applicant was arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the true facts are that one Chirag Sharma who had come to the liquor shop and had asked for some money from the victim, due to which they had some quarrel and under the influence of liquor Chirag assaulted Sagar. Further the same person Chirag Sharma lodged an FIR against the applicant at same police station i.e. Telibandha an offence under Sections 115(2), 296, 3(5) and 351(2) of BNS on 12.09.2024 at about 05.50 pm. He also submits that it would relevant to submit here that very smartly Chirag Sharma only to escape from his wrong doing has filed the above FIR and has become witness to the present crime, where Police has recorded his statement which clearly shows that he was totally made-up two different stories. He further submits that CCTV footage of the alleged time of the liquor shop has not been seized, which would have cleared the actual picture. He also submits that the applicant has been made an accused solely based on a name heard during the quarrel, whereas the FIR was registered against a person named Montu Chura, and the present applicant’s name is Shailendra, not Montu. He further submits that the injury sustained 3 to the injured is not multiple injury. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 13.09.2024 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the present applicant has stabbed the victim in the stomach with a knife, intending to kill him, and then pulled it out. As a result, victim’s intestines to protrude, and as per the opinion of the doctor the injuries were found to be dangerous to life, therefore, he is entitled for grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the fact that since the learned counsel stated that the applicant was made an accused solely based on a name heard during the quarrel, whereas the FIR was registered against a person named Montu Chura, and the present applicant’s name is Shailendra, not Montu, but he has not mentioned anywhere in this bail application that they are two different persons, further the fact that the present applicant has stabbed the victim in the stomach with a knife, intending to kill him, and then pulled it out as a result, victim’s intestines to protrude, and as per the opinion of the doctor and query report, the injuries were found to be dangerous to life, as such, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 4 Accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Shailendra Chhura @ Montu, involved in Crime No. 590/2024, registered at Police Station Telibandha, District : Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 109 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan