1 2026:CGHC:5790 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1108 of 2026 Dashrath Manjhi S/o Dhaniram Manjhi Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Bokramudha, Thana And Teh. Bagbehra, Distt- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O. Police Station Bagbehra Distt- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant _____________________________________________________ For Applicant :Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Ms. Palak Dwivedi, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.02.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this 2nd Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.02.03 14:52:27 +0530 2 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.69/2025 registered at Police Station – Bagbehra, District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence under Sections 281, 125(A), 125(B), 109 and 238 of the BNS, 2023. Earlier bail application was rejected on merits vide order dated 19.09.2025 passed in M.Cr.C No.5584/2025. 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution story is that the complainant namely Nurpat Yadav has lodged a report stating that his elder son Hemsagar was working in IBC 24 as journalist and on 16.02.2025, Hemsagar had gone to a party meeting and at 6 PM, Mukuram Netam had informed that Hemsagar has met with an accident and the applicant after hitting Hemsagar, has deliberately run over his motorcycle and Hemsagar was lying in the middle of the road. The complainant got his son from the road and admitted him in Chandi Hospital, who was in coma. Based on the above allegation, a report was lodged against the applicant. Hence, this application. 3. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He submits that the applicant is behind the bars since 15.06.2025, as per status of the trial, out of 6 witnesses, 5 have already been examined and injured Hemsagar has not 3 appeared before the trial Court despite summons being issued to him on 22.11.2025. He further submits that FIR was lodged with a considerable delay which has also not been explained and the main allegation is only against two co-accused as they have assaulted the injured with bricks and there is no any serious allegation against the present applicant. He lastly submits that conclusion of trial is likely to take quite some time, therefore, this 2nd bail application of the present applicant may be allowed. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that out of 6 witness, one of them is yet to be examined, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, submission of learned Counsel for the parties, further considering that this is 2nd bail application and the injured Hemsagar has not appeared before the trial Court in spite of being summoned long back, main allegation is against the co- accused, considering the status of trial which shows that out of 6 witness, 5 have already been examined, also considering the long detention period of the applicant, without further 4 commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to him. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed. 7. Let applicant- Dashrath Manjhi involved in Crime No. 69/2025 registered at Police Station – Bagbehra, District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence under Sections 281, 125(A), 125(B), 109 and 238 of the BNS, 2023 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 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 sufficient 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 5 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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Priya