1 2025:CGHC:8154 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1305 of 2025 Om Prakash Sahu S/o Ramjiyavan Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Gulab Nagar, Gudhiyari Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Gudhiyari, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Premshankar Yadav, Advocate. For Non-Applicant(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17/02/2025 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. 564/2024 registered at Police Station Gudhiyari, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act. AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that as per secret information received by the informant that one person, namely, Prakash Sahu @ Raja Bihari (present applicant) is wielding knife and threatening peoples near Chirkuti Mandir Gulab Nagar Road and on the basis of said information, the Police nab him and on asking for the document, he failed to produce the same, thereafter, the offence has been registered against him. Hence the bail application. 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 one Mayur Bervansh entered into the house of applicant with intention of committing theft, who was caught by sister of applicant against which FIR No.563/2024 under Sections 115(2), 296, 351(2) of BNS was lodged by her, thereafter when the police came in that area for search of Mayur Bervansh and due to sudden altercation of applicant with police personnel, he has been implicated in the present case. He also submits that the alleged place of incident is covered with CCTV, however, the police have not seized any footage of alleged incident, which also shows the false implication of applicant. The applicant is in jail since 04.09.2024, the applicant has three criminal antecedents, out of which, one is under the Arms Act of the year 2022 and two are under the IPC of the years 2021 and 2024, and the case of the year 2021 has already been disposed of on 13.08.2022, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that applicant has three criminal antecedents, out of which, one is under the Arms Act of the year 2022 and rest of the two cases are under the IPC of the years 2021 and 2024, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of 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, also considering the fact that the applicant has three criminal antecedents, out of which, one is of the year 2021 under the IPC, which has already been disposed of and besides that case, the applicant has only two cases pending against him, which are of the years 2022 and 2024, also considering the period of detention of applicant since 05.09.2023 and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant-Om Prakash Sahu, involved in Crime No. 564/2024 registered at Police Station Gudhiyari, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 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 4 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 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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil