Chattisgarh High Court
Tovendra Dewangan @ Lala vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 20 June, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:26359
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 4425 of 2025
1 - Tovendra Dewangan @ Lala S/o Kejuram Aged About 30 Years R/o Ward No. 16
Dauchora Khairagarh District- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.)
... Applicant
Versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station -
Gataarpar, District- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) (Wrongly Mention In
Impugned Order Police Station Name As Khairagarh Distt. K.C.G. Instead Of
Gataapar)
... Non-Applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate
For Non-Applicant : Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, Government Advocate
along with Mr. T.S. Sahu, Panel Lawyer
SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
ORDER ON BOARD
20/06/2025
1.
This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as
he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 67/2023 registered at
Police Station – Gataapar, District – Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai,
Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Section 302, 120 (B),
201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Case of prosecution is that, on 04.12.2023 at about 23:10 hrs, Dayal
Ram gave information on phone that one dead body of unknown person
SHUBHAM
DEY
is lying near Gram – Tingamali, Pani Khol Jungle Nala. Based on the
Digitally signed
by SHUBHAM
DEY
2
information, morgue was registered and after morgue inquiry,
aforementioned crime was registered against unknown persons. During
the course of investigation, applicant and co-accused was arrested.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent,
he has been falsely implicated in the crime. He has not committed any
offence as alleged. He submits that there are as many as 20 witnesses
out of which, only 05 witnesses have been examined till 29.04.2025. The
case is based on circumstantial evidence. Except the memorandum
statement, there is no other connecting piece of evidence against the
applicant, there is no seizure of any other incriminating article from the
possession of the applicant. Applicant is in jail since 06.12.2023. The co-
accused namely, Pratiksha Singh Rajput @ Sonam Singh who has
allegedly having ilicit relationship with the co-accused Hemant Ram has
been enlarged on bail in M.Cr.C. No. 8742/2024 vide order dated
13.12.2024, case of the applicant is also on similar footing. Hence, he
may be enlarged on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made
by the counsel for the applicant and would submit that there is evidence
in the case-diary of participation of the applicant in the aforementioned
offence. However, he do not dispute the submission of the counsel for the
applicant that co-accused Pratiksha Singh Rajput @ Sonam Singh has
been enlarged on bail and further, that the case is based on
circumstantial evidence.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the
documents filed along with the bail application.
6. Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of
allegations, submission of counsel for the respective parties, period of
pre-trial detention, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I
am inclined to allow this application for grant of bail.
3
7. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is allowed and it is directed that
applicant shall be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in
the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction
of Trial Court concerned 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 andin order to
secure her 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 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. Certified
copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Dey