1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1197 of 2025 • Lumesh Kumar Bhatri S/o Shri Pawan Bhatri Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Birejhar, Police Station Somani, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Somani, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aditya Bhardwaj, Advocate For Non-applicant : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 11/03/2025 1. Applicant has filed this second bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No. 267 of 2023 registered at Police Station – Somani, District – Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 34 of the I.P.C., 1860. The First bail application filed by the applicant in MCRC No. 1951 of 2024 which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 01.04.2024. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.03.12 18:06:39 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 11.11.2023 in between 04:00 pm to 07:00 pm, applicant along with co-accused Lumesh Kumar Bhatri have assaulted Sohan Kumar due to which he suffered grievous injuries and succumbed to injuries. His dead body was found under the bridge of Village Birejhar, Bandha. Merg was reported to concerned Police Station. During course of investigation, statement of Pankaj Kumar Bhatri and Nutan Sahu was recorded, who are stated to be eye-witnesses. Based upon which, aforementioned crime was registered and applicant was arrested on 13.11.2023. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that co-accused namely Neelkamal Bhatri has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 23.01.2025 in MCRC No. 662 of 2025. He submits that so called eye-witnesses have been examined before learned trial Court and they have not supported case of prosecution. Except statement of Pankaj Kumar Bhatri and Nutan Sahu recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., there is no other connecting piece of evidence against applicant, hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and would submit that there are two eye- witnesses to the incident and they have made specific allegation against applicant of assaulting deceased along with co-accused in their statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C.. She 3 however submits that submission made by learned counsel for applicant based upon deposition of Pankaj Kumar Bhatri and Nutan Sahu is subject matter of appreciation by learned trial Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, period of pre-trial detention of applicant, further considering the fact that co-accused has also granted bail by this Court, submission of learned counsel for the respective parties, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to enlarge applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that - (a) 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. b) 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. c) 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 4 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. (d) 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE vaishali