1 2025:CGHC:10102 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 83 of 2025 1 - Raju Sahu S/o Balgovind Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Purana Bazarpara, Surajpur, Police Station And District- Surajpur, C.G. --- Appellant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Surajpur, District-Surajpur (C.G.) --- Respondent CRA No. 247 of 2025 1 - Manish Kumar Jaiswal S/o Shri Pramod Kumar Jaiswal Aged About 27 Years R/o Village- Ketka, Police Station And Tehsil Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. ---Appellant Versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S.- Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent CRA No. 269 of 2025 1 - Ashok Sahu S/o Late Rambharosh Sahu Aged About 50 Years 2 - Sunny Sahu S/o Ashok Sahu Aged About 22 Years Both are R/o Purana Bazaarpara, Police Station And Tehsil Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) ---Appellants ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.03.03 18:23:47 +0530 2 Versus 1 – State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Surajpur, Dist- Surajpur (C.G.) --- Respondent For respective appellants : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal & Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocates For State /Respondent : Ms. Sunita Sahu, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 28/02/2025 1. Since all these criminal appeals are arising out of the same crime number, therefore, they are being heard and decided together by this common order. 2. CRA No.83 of 2025 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 23/12/2024, passed in Bail Application No.550/2024 by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Surajpur, whereby the application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. of the appellant has been rejected. The appellant has preferred this appeal for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.573/2024 registered in Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) for offence punishable under sections 296B, 351 (3), 221, 132, 118, 121 (2), 109 (2) BNS and Sections 3 (1) (R-S), 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes 3 (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989). 3. CRA No.247 of 2025 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 06/01/2025 passed in Special Sessions Trial No.30/2024 by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Surajpur, District Surajpur, C.G. whereby the application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. of the appellant has been rejected. The appellant has preferred this appeal for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.573/2024 registered in Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) for offence punishable under sections 296B, 351 (3), 221, 132, 118(2), 121 (2), 109 (2) BNS and Sections 3 (1) (R-S), 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989). 4. CRA No.269 of 2025 under Section 14-A (2) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellants being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 09/01/2025, passed in Bail Application No.16/2025 in Special Sessions Trial No.30/2024 by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities), Surajpur, District Surajpur, C.G. whereby the application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. of the appellant has been rejected. The appellant has preferred this appeal for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.573/2024 registered in Police Station Surajpur, District 4 Surajpur (C.G.) for offence punishable under sections 296B, 351 (3), 221, 132, 118(2), 121 (2), 109 (2) BNS and Sections 3 (1) (R-S), 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989). 5. As per the prosecution case, the complainant Ghanshyam Sonwani lodged a report in the Police Station Surajpur that on 13/10/2024 at about 9.00 PM when he was controlling the crowd/public in the event of immersion of Durga Idol, at that time the accused Kuldeep was standing there and as soon as the complainant reached near to the accused, the accused Kuldeep Sahu thrown the hot oil on the complainant, whereby he sustained grievous injuries. Thereafter, on the basis of the report lodged, the investigation was carried out and the appellants were arrested. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the appellants have been falsely implicated because initially the appellants were not named in the FIR but subsequently their names have been added. They would next contend that no specific role have been attributed to the present appellants and they have been implicated in the instant case because of their relationship with the main accused but they were not present on the place at the time of the incident. They would next contend that the chrage-sheet in this case has been filed and no further custodial interrogation is required, therefore, they would submit that 5 the appellants may be enlarged on bail. 7. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. 9. Perusal of the FIR would show that the appellants were not named in the FIR and the main allegation is on the accused namely Kuldeep. Further the perusal of the documents would show that the complainant himself is a Constable and he has made complaint against one Kuldeep alleging that the hot oil was thrown on the complainant and even in the FIR it has not been mentioned that they the present appellants were involved in the crime or present at the time of incident on the spot. It is only after two days i.e. on 15/10/2024 the name of the present appellants were mentioned. Considering the fact that the appellants were not named in the FIR initially and subsequently their names were added and also taking into consideration the fact that the charge-sheet in this case has already been filed before the trial Court and it will take time to conclude the trial, therefore, looking to the facts & circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the appellants on bail. 10. Accordingly, all the appeals are allowed and the impugned orders are set-aside. 6 11. Let the appellants herein involved in Crime No.573/2024, registered at Police Station- Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) for the offences as mentioned above, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000-10,000/-with one surety (each appellant) in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions : (i) The appellants 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 appellants 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 him/her under Section 269 of BNS, 2023. (iii) In case, the appellants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of the BNSS, 2023 is issued and the appellantss fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of BNS, 2023. (iv) The appellants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the 7 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 appellants 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/her in accordance with law. 12. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Ashu