Rahul Dhruw Vs State of Chhattisgarh

The applicant had preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of BNS Act for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 360/2025, registered at Police StationSimga, Distt Baloda-Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 103(1) 61(2) of BNS Act.

¶17

2

¶18

The prosecution story in brief, is that Aman Mandle lodged a complaint through Dehaati Nalsi that on 4.07.2025 at 8 p.m. in the night, he was sitting near a roadside in front of his uncle Sanjay's Mandle's shop along with his cousin Tamraz Mahipal and other villagers namely Dileshwar Dahariya, Rajesh, Krishna Nishad, and some other villagers were also sitting there a few feet away. At the same moment, two Eeco vehicles came, from which Sunil Patre, Amardeep Patre, and their other friends came out. They suddenly came there and started using filthy language for his cousin Tamraz Mahipal and started beating him with a wooden stick and sharp object, and also with their hands. Their intention was to kill him by applying force on his head and chest, on which a criminal case was registered against them, including the present applicant. Victim Tamraz Mahipal died during treatment.

¶19

It was argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Prosecution has failed to collect any incriminating evidence implicating the present applicant in the commission of the alleged offence. The present applicant has not been named in the First Information Report (FIR). Prosecution has also failed to establish any prima facie evidence of conspiracy between the present applicant and co-accused persons. The main accused in this case is Sunil Patre and Amardeep Patre. The case against the present applicant appears to be based solely on the memorandum statements of co-accused persons and statements of prosecution witnesses, which are not corroborated by any independent evidence. No

¶20

3

¶21

incriminating articles have been seized from the possession of the present applicant. One of the co-accused person, namely Salikram Dhruw, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 04.11.2025 in MCRC No.8736/2025. A pplicant is in jail since 08.07.2025, charge sheet has been presented, trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶22

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant.

¶23

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

¶24

Considering facts of the case, nature of allegation, submissions of counsel for the parties, the fact that only on the basis of statement of the co-accused present applicant has made accused in this case, eyewitnesses of this case in their statements have not made any allegation against this applicant, even injured person did not name the present applicant in his evidence, particularly the fact that Aman Mandle, Sanjay Mandle and Dili Kumari did not identify the present applicant in test identification parade, further considering that main accused in this case is Sunil Patre and Amardeep Patre and present applicant has not having any previous criminal antecedent, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶25

Let the applicant- Rahul Dhruw involved in Crime No. 360/2025, registered at Police Station- Simga, Distt Baloda-Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 103(1) 61(2) of BNS Act be released on bail on his

¶26

4

¶27

furnishing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶28

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.

¶29

(ii) The applicants 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 them under Section 269 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023

¶30

(iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS, is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶31

(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

¶32

5

¶33

statement under Section 351 BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants 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 them in accordance with law.

¶34

However, this Court hopes and trusts that the if the charge sheet is submitted against the applicant, the Trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, if there is no any legal impediment.

¶35

Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

(Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

¶38

Arpan

Rahul Dhruw v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

Rahul Dhruw 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohit Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramkhilawan Sahu Vs Executive Engineer Constru. and Anr.

Saurabh Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sonal Jain Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Husn Ghritlahre Alias Dadu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lakshman Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh