1 2025:CGHC:8151 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1315 of 2025 Rohit Singh S/o Abhay Singh Aged About 31 Years R/o Domanhill Chirmiri P.S. Chirmiri Distric - M.C.B. (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer Police Station Chirmiri District - (M.C.B.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.02.2025 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. 203/2024 registered at Police Station Chirmiri District – M.C.B. (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 296, 351(2), 351(3), 115(2), 331(6), 109,191(2), 191(3), 190 of the BNS and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the complainant namely Parminder Singh appeared before the Chirmiri Police Station on 19.07.2024 at 11.30 pm and lodged a report on 19.07.2024 at about 10.45 pm against the accused persons stating therein that when he KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 was near his house, at the same time, the complainant's nephew Amrik Singh was coming to the complainant's house with his children for a walk. Then on the way, two persons started abusing Amrik Singh by asking him how he drives a scooter. Hearing the noise, the complainant Parminder Singh came out of the house and saw that the injured Amrik Singh was parking the scooter with his child. When he asked the abusers to go home, they left. After some time, the applicant and other co-accused came and broke the door of the house and entered the house. They abused the mother and sister and threatened to kill him and attacked him with iron rod, sword, angle pipe with the intention of killing. Injured Amrik Singh and Manpreet Singh have suffered grievous injuries on their head and cheeks and when they tried to intervene, the complainant Parminder Singh, Kulwinder Kaur, Sukhwinder Kaur and Jaspreet Kaur were also beaten and received injuries. Thereafter, the aforesaid offences have been registered against the accused. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in crime in question. He further submits that after investigation, Section 109 of BNSS was added because there is injury on head wherein the medical report suggests that there is simple injury therefore, no case under Section 109 of BNSS is made out against the applicant. He further submits that one of the co-accused namely Shravan Jha has already been granted bail by the learned trial Court and two co-accused namely Navin Kumar Pandey and Amrit Singh have been granted bail by this Court being MCRC No. 7810/2024, MCRC No. 8933/2024 vide its order dated 12.11.2024 and also the medical reports do not support 3 the story by the prosecution and the applicant has some criminal antecedents which has been clearly explained in the bail application of para No. 4A and besides this, no case has pending against him and he is in jail since 01.10.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submit that the complainant Parminder Singh's nephew, Amrik Singh, was harassed by two individuals while walking with his children. The situation escalated when the accused, along with others, broke into Parminder's house, abused his family and violently attacked on Amrik and Parminder with iron rods, swords, and pipes, causing severe head and cheeks injuries. The complainant's family members, including women, were also beaten and injured while trying to intervene and also the applicant has 18 previous criminal antecedents under the preventive action which have already been disposed off and moreover in 17 criminal cases, the applicant has already been acquitted and now only one previous case is pending against him as such he is a habitual offender. Accordingly, 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 that the applicant has 18 previous criminal antecedents under the preventive action, which have already been disposed off and moreover in 17 criminal cases, the applicant has already been acquitted and now only one previous case is pending against him which has been 4 clearly explained in the bail application and also considering the fact that in the present case, one of the co-accused namely Shravan Jha has already been granted bail by the learned trial Court and two co- accused namely Navin Kumar Pandey and Amrit Singh have been granted bail by this Court being MCRC No. 7810/2024, MCRC No. 8933/2024 vide its order dated 12.11.2024 and also the medical reports do not support the story by the prosecution and the applicant is in jail since 01.10.2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Rohit Singh, involved in Crime No. 203/2024 registered at Police Station Chirmiri District – M.C.B. (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 296, 351(2), 351(3), 115(2), 331(6), 109,191(2), 191(3), 190 of the BNS and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two heavy 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 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 5 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal