Aghanu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

The applicants have filed this bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrrik Suraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail as they are in custody in connection with Crime No. 66/2024 registered at police station Rengakhar, District Kabirdham (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 191(2), 191(3), 189(5), 127(2), 287, 333, 324(6) , 310(2), 326(g),61(2)(a), 189(4), 332 (b) of BNS, 2023.

¶30

Prosecution case in brief is that report was lodged by complainant Roman Kumar Sahu on 15.09.2024 against 40-50 persons alleging that at about 10.00 pm when he and his brother went to hospital and their mother Jago Bai, wife Kajakin Bai, sisters-in-law Uttara and Savitri and children were in the house, at that point of time, the villagers came after breaking open the door and committed loot of household articles and had set the motorcycle on fire. It is alleged that the family members escaped and when the police personnel came to the place of incident they informed about the incident. On the basis of the report, the police registered the offence against the accused persons and they were arrested.

¶31

3

¶32

Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case alleging them to be the main accused. He further contended that on perusal of the evidence, it is clear that there is no direct role of the applicants in the crime in question. It is also clear that the complainant was not able to disclose the role attributed to the present applicants in the crime. It is submitted that similarly placed co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court in batch of M.Cr.Cs. No. 15/2025 and other connected cases, vide order dated 31.01.2025, the present applicants may also be granted similar benefit. It is contended that there are no previous antecedents against the applicants, charge sheet has been filed, they are in jail since 16.09.2024 and the trial is likely to take some time, they are ready and willing to comply with any of the conditions which may be imposed upon them and thus, it is submitted that the application be allowed and the applicants be released on bail.

¶33

Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail applications.

¶34

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶35

On due consideration of the rival submissions and further considering the involvement of the applicants in the present case and looking to the fact that the injuries sustained by the injured were simple in nature and there are no previous antecedents against the applicants, they are in jail since 16.09.2024, charge sheet has been filed and that the final disposal of the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time, the present applications deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, their bail applications are allowed.

¶36

It is directed that in the event of applicants’ executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- each with one surety to the satisfaction of the

¶37

4

¶38

concerned trial court, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:

¶39

I) they shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the 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.

¶40

ii) they shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/her counsel. In case of his absence without sufficient cause,t he trial court may proceed against him/her under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

¶41

iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his/her presence, proclamation under Section 84 of the BNSS, 2023 is issued and the applicants failed to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/her. In accordance with law under Section 209 of BNS, 2023.

¶42

iv) The applicants 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, 2023.If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants are deliberate or without sufficient cause,t hen it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him/her in accordance with law.

¶43

Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial court

¶44

for necessary information and compliance forthwith.

Sd/-

(Arvind Kumar Verma)

Judge

Digitally signed by SUGUNA SUGUNA DUBEY DUBEY Date:2025.02.07 14:45:00 +0530

Aghanu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aghanu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Pushpa Tiwari Vs Shri Gireesh Kumar Shrivastava

Narayan Kaushal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Aaa Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shivdayal Sinha Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gaurav Tiwari Vs Smt. Rachna Tiwari

Smt. Liyo Vs Miss Divya Umesh