[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Girdhari Sharma vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 March, 2026
Author: Parth Prateem Sahu
Bench: Parth Prateem Sahu
1/4
2026:CGHC:14426
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2314 of 2026
1 - Girdhari Sharma S/o Late Soorajmal Sharma Aged About 47 Years R/o
Kadambari Nagar Quarter No.137.P.S. Mohan Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.)
2 - Uday Sharma S/o Girdhari Sharma Aged About 21 Years R/o Kadambari
Nagar Quarter No.137, P.S. Mohan Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer P.S. Mohan Nagar
District- Durg (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Applicants : Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, Advocate
For State : Mr. Aditya Tiwari, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
Order On Board
25/03/2026
1. Applicants have filed this third bail application under Section 483 of
Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as they
have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 223 of 2025 registered
at Police Station -Mohan Nagar, District-Drug (C.G.) for offence
punishable under Sections 103 (1), 296, 351 (3), 115 (2), 3 (5) of BNS,
Digitally
signed by 2023.
PRAVEEN
KUMAR
SINHA
Date:
2026.03.27
14:38:39
+0530
2. Case of prosecution in brief is that on 26.05.2025 at about 11:30 AM
deceased Ankit Sharma along with his brother Ketan Sharma was in his
workplace- Balaji Workshop, motor body builder, situated at Transport
Nagar, Dhamdha Naka Road and were engaged in doing their work. At
the relevant point of time, uncle of deceased Ankit Sharma i.e. applicant
no 1 Girdhari Sharma along with his son applicant no. 2 Uday Sharma
came in work shop and started quarreling with them due to some motor
garage work. Thereafter, they also stared abusing in filthy language and
started assaulting by hands and fists and also by steel pipe and iron
angle. In the aforementioned assault, Ketan Sharma and deceased
Ankit Sharma suffered injuries and were taken to hospital. Ankit Sharma
suffered grievous injuries and died to injuries suffered by him on the
same date. Incident was reported based upon which aforementioned
crime was registered and applicants were arrested.
3. Learned counsel for applicants submits that second application for grant
of bail was dismissed on merit considering that there are eyewitnesses
to the incident. Now all the eyewitnesses have been examined and they
have not supported the case of prosecution. Copy of deposition sheet of
eyewitnesses have been placed on record. Applicants are in jail since
27.05.2025. There are as many as 25 witnesses out of which only 6
witnesses were examined till 09.02.2026. Trial may take some time,
hence, applicants may be enlarged on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission
made by learned counsel for the applicants and further submits that
there are 6 eyewitnesses to the incident namely- Jitesh Kumar Jangid,
Surendra Jangid, Afroj Aalam, Jitendra Dewangan and Ketan Sharma.
He submits that submission of learned counsel for the applicants based
on deposition of the eyewitnesses is subject matter of appreciation by
the trial Court. He however submits that witness Gursimran Singh has
not been examined.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that witness Gursimran Singh
was given up by prosecution. Order sheet dated 09.02.2026 is filed in
this regard along with covering memo.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents
placed on record.
7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for the respective
parties, 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
applicants shall be released on regular bail on furnishing a personal bail
bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one surety in the like sum to
the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that:-.
"(a) The applicants 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 applicants 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 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 are 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."
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
