[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Anoop Sori vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12952
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2554 of 2026
Anoop Sori S/o Late Rameshwar Sori Aged About 27 Years R/o Village
Bramhni, P.S. Gariyaband, Distt. Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Gariyaband,
District - Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh.
---Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Digitally
RAJSHEKHAR signed by
SONI RAJSHEKHAR
SONI Order on Board
18.03.2026
1.
The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application 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.
111/2025, registered at Police Station - Gariyaband, District -
Gariyaband (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296 and
109(1) of the BNS.
2. The case of the prosecution, is that on 05/07/2025, the complainant
Biren Singh Sori father of the injured namely Ved Prakash Sori lodged
the report in the Police Station Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
to effect that on the date of incident i.e. on 04/07/2025 at about 09:30
PM, when the complainant reached the house, then he saw that the
injured namely Ved Prakash Sori was sustained injury and bleeding out
on which the complainant asked regarding the incident, then injured
Ved Prakash Sori said that he switched off the electricity supply of the
applicant' house due to electricity bill was not paid by him, then the
applicant assaulted by the way tangiya to the injured. Further, it is
alleged that when switched off the electricity supply of the applicant'
house, then the present accused/applicant come near the incident
place and he was used filthy language and abused the injured, on
hearing the sound of applicant, the injured come out side of the house,
then the present accused/applicant assaulted by the way tangiya to the
injured, in result this assault, the injured has sustained injury in the
head. After the incident, the complainant lodged the report in the Police
Station concerned against the present accused/applicant. Hence, this
application.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and the charge-
sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that the
applicant is said to have assaulted and caused injuries to the injured
with tangiya, and though the injured has suffered one lacerated wound
on his frontal region which is a grievous injury, but the charges have
been framed against the applicant who is in jail since 05.07.2025, and
till date no single witness has been examined by the trial Court, and
also there is no any X-ray report to show that such internal damage in
cause to the injured, the trial is likely to take quite long time for its
conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail
application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in this
case. It is further submitted that the applicant is said to have assaulted
the injured with a tangiya and caused him a lacerated wound on his
frontal region, and as per the MLC report, the injuries sustained to the
injured are grievous in nature, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of
bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the
documents available on record.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the
fact that charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, and the
applicant is said to have assaulted and caused injuries to the injured
with tangiya, and though the injured has suffered one lacerated wound
on his frontal region which is a grievous injury, but the charges have
been framed against the applicant who is in jail since 05.07.2025, and
till date no single witness has been examined by the trial Court, and
also there is no any X-ray report to show that such internal damage in
cause to the injured, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some
time, I am inclined to allow this application.
7. Let applicant, Anoop Sori, involved in Crime No. 111/2025, registered
at Police Station - Gariyaband, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Sections 296 and 109(1) of the BNS, be
released on bail on his furnishing a 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 him under
Section 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
Rajshekhar
