Chattisgarh High Court
Jubair Khan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 16 April, 2025
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2025:CGHC:17448
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2280 of 2025
1.
Jubair Khan S/o Aadil Khan @ Jubi Aged About 20 Years R/o
Risaipara (Wrongly Mentioned Isaipara In The Impugned
Order) Near Gayatri Mandir Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C.G.)
— Applicant(s)
versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Of Police Station, Purur,
District – Balod (C.G.)
— Non-Applicant(s)
MCRC No. 2381 of 2025
1. Jubair Khan @ Jubi S/o Aadil Khan Aged About 20 Years R/o
Risaipara (Wrongly Mentioned Isaipara In The Impugned
Order) Near Gayatri Mandir Dhamtari, District- Dhamtari (C.G.)
—Applicant(s)
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Of Police Station
Charama, District- North Bastar Kanker (C.G.)
— Non-Applicant(s)
MCRC No. 2503 of 2025
Digitally
signed by
MANISH
MANISH YADAV
YADAV Date:
2025.04.21
15:20:50
+0530
2
1. Dipanshu Sahu S/o Shri Narendra Sahu Aged About 21 Years
Resident Of Gauri Nagar Gali No. 07, Composit Building Ke
Piche Rudri, Dhamtari, Tah. And Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.)
—Applicant(s)
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In-Charge Of Police
Station- Purur, District- Balod (Chhattisgarh)
— Non-Applicant(s)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Hemant Kumar Agrawal, Advocate
and Mr. Ashish Sahu, Advocate
For Non-Applicant(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel LawyerHon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order On Board
16.04.2025
1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video
conferencing.
2. Since the issues involved in the above-mentioned three bail
applications are same, they are clubbed and heard together
and are being disposed of by this common order.
3. These are the First bail applications filed under Section 483
of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of
regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in
connection with Crime Numbers as mentioned under:
MCRC No. Crime No. Police Station Offence
2280/2025 127/2024 P.S. Purur, Sections 309(4), 309(6),
District – Balod 311, 238, 3(5) BNSS
(corresponding Sections
(C.G.) 392, 394, 397, 201, 34 of
IPC) & Sections 25 & 27
of Arms Act.
3
2381/2025 170/2024 P.S. Charama, Sections 309(4), 309(6),
District – North 109(1), 3(5) BNSS
(corresponding Sections
Bastar Kanker 392, 307, 34 of IPC) &
(C.G.) Sections 25 & 27 of Arms
Act [S. 109(1) of the
BNSS added in the
charge sheet].
2503/2025 127/2024 P.S. Purur, Sections 309(4), 309(6),
District – Balod 311, 238, 3(5) BNSS &
Sections 25 & 27 of Arms
(C.G.) Act.
4. In MCRC No. 2280/2025 and MCRC No. 2381/2025 – The
Prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a
report stating that on 05.12.2024 at about 05:00 AM when
complainant Dhananjay Nishad with his friend Tileshwar Taram
was going to morning walk, at that 3 unknown masked persons
came by motorcycle, stabbed the complainant in the thigh of
the left leg and took away his mobile at a value of Rs. 10,000/-
of the Vivo Company. The Police Station Charama registered
an FIR, during investigation found child in conflict with law
(namely – Mayank Khatri) stabbed the injured person, co-
accused Dipanshu Sahu was driving the motorcycle and
applicant was only sitting in the motorcycle. After completing
the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed under Sections
309(4), 309(6), 311, 238, 3(5) BNSS (corresponding Sections
392, 394, 397, 201, 34 of IPC) & Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act.
5. In MCRC No. 2503/2025 – The Prosecution case, in brief, is
that the complainant lodged a report before the Police Station
4
Purur, District – Balod (C.G.) stating that on 05.12.2024 at
about 05:00 AM when complainant Dhananjay Nishad and
Tileshwar Taram were taking morning walk on NH-30 road
when 03 persons got down and took away the complainant’s
Vivo Mobile phone and the other person stabbed him on his
left thigh with a knife due to which he started bleeding. On the
report of the complainant, a crime was registered against 03
unknown persons by the police station Purur under Sections
309(4), 309(6), 311, 238, 3(5) BNSS & Sections 25 & 27 of
Arms Act.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the
applicants are innocent person and they have not committed
any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they are falsely
implicated in the present cases. It is further submitted that the
applicant in MCRC No. 2280/2025 and MCRC No. 2381/2025
has one criminal antecedent which is pending and the
applicant in MCRC No. 2503/2025 has no any criminal
antecedents of similar nature. It is further submitted that from
the possession of the applicant in MCRC No. 2280/2025 and
MCRC No. 2381/2025 only Rs. 50/- and his own mobile of
Samsung Company was seized and from the possession of
the applicant in MCRC No. 2503/2025 only Rs. 70/- along with
one mobile of Vivo Company was seized. They further
submitted that the charge-sheets have been submitted and the
5
applicants are in jail since 23.12.2024 and 07.12.2024.
Therefore, they pray that the applicants be enlarged on bail.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes
the bail application and also endorse the submission made by
the learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that
injured sustained injuries were grievous in nature, therefore, they
are not entitled to be released on bail.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
case diary.
9. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature
and gravity of allegation made against the applicants and the
fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present cases
before the competent Courts and they are in jail since
23.12.2024 and 07.12.2024, therefore, this Court is of the view
that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this
case.
10. Let applicants, Jubair Khan @ Jubi and Dipanshu Sahu,
involved in Crime Nos. 170/2024, registered at Police Station
Charama, District – North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) (MCRC No.
2280/2025) and Crime No. 127/2024, registered at Police
Station Purur, District – Balod (C.G.) (MCRC No. 2381/2025 &
MCRC No. 2503/2025), for the offence punishable under
Sections 309(4), 309(6), 109(1), 311, 238, 3(5) BNSS
(corresponding Sections 392, 394, 307, 397, 201, 34 of IPC) &
6
Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act, be released on bail on their
each furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like
sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the
following conditions:-
(i) The applicants will file an undertaking to the
effect that they will 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 applicants will 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 BNS.
(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 BNS.
(iv) The applicants will remain present, in person,
7before 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 them in accordance with law.
11. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the
trial Court concerned for necessary information and
compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Manish