Chattisgarh High Court
Naresh Dheewar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 24 January, 2025
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1/4
2025:CGHC:4460
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 688 of 2025
1 - Naresh Dheewar S/o Shri Nand Kumar Dheewar Aged About 52 Years R/o.
Village Farfaud, Police Station Aarang, District Raipur (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Aarang, District Raipur (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Pushpendra Patel, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State. : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
24.01.2025
1.
This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to
the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.
332/2024 registered at Police Station Aarang, District – Raipur
(C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337,
304(A), 304, 338 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. The prosecution’s story is that, the complainant Kumar Singh
Chandrakar had lodged a written report in Police Station Aarang on
17.04.2024, alleging therein that he along with his nephew (Naresh
Chandrakar), wife (Smt. Tameshwari Chandrakar), daughter
SHAYNA
KADRI
Digitally signed by
SHAYNA KADRI
Date: 2025.01.25
13:45:34 +0530
2/4
(Garima Chandrakar), son (Vinay Chandrakar) was travelling
through Motorcycle to village Mokhla and when they reached near
Bodra Road drainage, accused by driving the Sumo rashly,
negligently, carelessly and dashed the motorcycle of the
complainant, resultantly Tameshwrai Chandrakar died on the spot.
Thereafter the incident was reported to the concerned Police
Station and applicant was arrested on 20.04.2024.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant
is innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the
foresaid case. He submits that it is accidental case in which
deceased lost his life due to rash and negligent driving. Though
F.I.R. has been registered against applicant for offence under
Sections 279, 337, 304 (A) and 338 I.P.C., but to give a serious
colour to incident and to make offence non-bailable and cognizance,
offence under Section 304 of I.P.C. has also been added. He
contended that there is no criminal antecedent registered against
applicant. He also submits that the charge-sheet has been filed and
present applicant is in jail since 20.04.2024, conclusion of the trial
may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail
application of the present applicant and submits that the wife and
son of complainant died due to rash and negligent driving by
applicant. The charge-sheet has already been submitted before the
competent Court in the present case. therefore, applicant is not
entitled for grant of regular bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
3/4
diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature of allegation, there is no criminal antecedent against the
applicant, as also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has
already been submitted before the competent Court in the present
case and the applicant has been languishing in jail since
20.04.2024, and conclusion of the trial may takes some more time.
Therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be
released on bail in this case.
7. Let the Applicant – Naresh Dheewar, involved in Crime No.
332/2024 registered at Police Station Aarang, District – Raipur
(C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337,
304(A), 304, 338 of Indian Penal Code, 1860., be released on bail
on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to
the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following
conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect
that he 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.
(ii) The applicant 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 his under
4/4Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail
during trial and in order to secure his presence,
proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued
and the applicant fails to appear before the court on
the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial
court shall initiate proceedings against him, in
accordance with law, under Section 209 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iv) The applicant 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 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 him in
accordance with law.
8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance
forthwith.
- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Shayna
[ad_1]
Source link