T. Jay Reddy vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J

Heard.

These are the three applications filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants, who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 15/2023 registered at Police Station Old Bhilai, District Durg (CG), for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 336, 212, 302 read with 149 and 34 of the IPC.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 08.01.2023 at about 11:45 pm, a mob attacked, Suraj Choudhary and Manoj Choudhary due to which they suffered grievous injuries over their person and succumbed to those injuries. Incident was reported to the concerned Police Station and based on the statements of Anil Kumar Sudhakar, Ritesh Ahiwar and Liladhar Sagarvanshi, the applicants were arrested on 09.01.2023.

Learned counsel for the respective applicants would submit that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. They further submit that similarly situated co-accused Vikas Tiwari, from whom, a blood stained iron rod has been recovered, has been granted bail by the Coordinate Bench vide order dated 16.10.2024 passed in MCRC No.6744/2024. They also submit that the material witnesses, memorandum & seizure witnesses as also eye-witnesses have also been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution. Learned counsel for the respective applicants lastly submit that considering the pre-trial detention of the applicants and also considering that conclusion of trial is likely to take some more time, the applicants may be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail applications. However, he would not dispute the fact that the case of the present applicants is similar to that the said co-accused who have been enlarged on bail. He submits that against applicant – Sheikh Amir, there is one criminal antecedent registered under Sections 294, 323 and 506 of the IPC registered at Police Station Old Bhilai District Durg vide Crime No.318/2021.

In reply to the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the applicant -Sheikh Amir would submit that in the aforesaid case, the applicant has already been acquitted and the copy of the relevant order sheet has been filed in the bail application filed by him.

When a query has been put to learned counsel for the State with regard to the FSL report, he would submit that the FSL report has not yet been filed though more than two years have elapsed.

In view of the above, learned counsel for the State is directed to send a letter to the concerned Director (Forensic Science Laboratory) in this regard so that the said report is filed in a prompt manner.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties as also considering the fact that the co-accused Vikas Tiwari has already been enlarged on bail and the case of the present applicant is similar to that of the said co-accused and further considering the pre-trial detention of the applicants and that the conclusion of trial is likely to take some more time, I am of the opinion that the present are the fit cases to enlarge the applicants on bail on the ground of parity.

Accordingly, the Applications are allowed and the applicants are directed to be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, on the following conditions:-

“(a) 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.

(b) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

(c) In case, the applicants misuse 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 the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

(d) 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. 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.”

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

Certified copy as per rules.