Chattisgarh High Court
Surendra Sonha vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 11 July, 2025
-1-
2025:CGHC:32221
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 5165 of 2025
Surendra Sonha S/o Late Thakur Sonha Aged About 50 Years
Village- Girvarganj, P.S- Chalgali, District- Balarampur-Ramanujganj
(C.G.)
... Applicant (s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. P.S- Chalgali, District-
Balarampur-Ramanujganj, C.G.
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant : Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate
For State : Mr. T.S. Sahu, Panel Lawyer
S.B.: Hon’ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
Order On Board
11/07/2025
1. Applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ” BNSS”)
for grant of regular bail as he was arrested in connection with
Crime No.29 of 2023 registered at Police Station -Chalgali,
District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (CG) for offence punishable
under Section 302 of IPC.
2. This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. His
Digitally
signed by
earlier bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on
PRAVEEN
KUMAR
SINHA
Date:
2025.07.14
14:16:43
+0530
21.12.2023.
-2-
3. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 23.06.2023 at about 4:00
to 5:00 pm, applicant has assaulted his mother Tilakmania by
means of fists and legs due to which she suffered injuries and
died. Incident was reported to concerned police station based
upon which aforementioned crime was registered and applicant
was arrested on 07.07.2023.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that applicant
has been falsely implicated in the crime. He has not committed
any offence. During trial, material witnesses have now been
examined and they have not supported case of prosecution. He
contended that as per charge sheet, Suman Sonha is the only
eyewitness to the incident, she has been examined as PW5 and
has not supported case of prosecution. He submits that
memorandum witnesses have also been examined and they
have not supported case of prosecution.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the
submission of learned counsel for the applicant. He submits that
there are ample evidence available against the applicant in case
diary. He, however, submits that submission of learned counsel
for the applicant based on deposition of the witnesses enclosed
along with the bail application is subject matter of appreciation
by the trial Court .
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused
the documents placed along with the bail application.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of
-3-
allegation, submission of learned counsel for the respective
parties, period of pre-trial detention, without commenting
anything on merits of case, I am inclined to allow the application.
8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the
applicant shall be released on regular bail on his furnishing a
personal bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in
the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions
that:-.
“(a) 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.
(b) 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 him under
Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(c) 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.
(d) 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
-4-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.”
9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance
forthwith.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/—-/-/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Praveen