2024:CGHC:32246 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5888 of 2024

1 - Anurag Khande S/o Late Shri Hincchharam Aged About 21 Years R/o - Bhatapara, P.S.- Lormi, Dist. - Mungeli, C.G.

2 - Gend Khathle S/o - Mohit Khathle Aged About 21 Years R/o -

Bedapara, P.S.- Lormi, Dist. - Mungeli, C.G.

... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O Of Police Station - Lormi, Dist. -

Mungeli, C.G.

... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Pallav Mishra, Advocate.

For Non-Applicant : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order on Board

23/08/2024

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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 194/2024 registered at Police Station Lormi, Dist. - Mungeli (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’).

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a written complaint on 03.05.2024 that he went to his Maternal uncle’s house to fetch money Rs.15,000/-. While he was returning from uncle’s house at Khamhi Rahan Bridge the present accused were sitting on a white motorcycle who stopped him. They were being accomplice by three other accused, whose names were neither recorded by the prosecution nor were they arrested by them. The present accused assaulted the complainant and looted the money given by his uncle and a mobile phone. The accused/applicants have also looted the key of the motorcycle and the complainant was made to return back to his uncle’s house. Thereafter, the narrated the entire story to his uncle, who recognized the A-1, being the owner of white motorcycle. His uncle also recognized other accused persons. Hence, on the basis of the uncle’s statement the present applicants were arrested by the prosecution.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that there is delay of six days in lodging the FIR without any proper explanation and the medical report of the prosecution denies the theory of assault. He further submits that the uncle recognized the A-1 on the same night when the incident took place but he decided to keep mum and waited for six days to lodge FIR. He also submits that the main accused who is juvenile has been granted bail by the Juvenile Board, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure A-2, and the other two co-accused persons were absconding. The applicants are in jail since 10.05.2024 and the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant No.1 has one criminal antecedent of the year 2023 under the IPC and applicant No.2 has no criminal antecedent. She further submits that there is also recovery of Rs.4,000/- from the applicant No.2 (Gend Khathle). She also submits that the other two co- accused persons who have absconded are arrested, therefore, the applicants are not entitled for grant of bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case also considering the fact that there are 3 more persons alongwith applicants are present in this case, out of which one has already been granted bail by the Juvenile Board and other 2 accused persons were absconded at that time were arrested later, further the criminal antecedent of the applicants are concerned, applicant No.1 has only one criminal antecedent of the year 2023 under the IPC and applicant No.2 has no criminal antecedent and the charge- sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and they are in jail since 10.05.2024, without expressing any opinon on the mertis of the case, this Court