Chhattisgarh High Court Denies Bail to Accused Charged with Conspiracy and Grievous Assault Under BNSS 2023, Citing Petitioner’s Direct Role in Facilitating Crime and Severity of Victim’s Injuries

Court’s Decision:

The Chhattisgarh High Court denied the bail application of the accused, Surendra Singh Lohiya, involved in Crime No. 271/2024 under Section 109 and Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. The court emphasized the severity of the injuries sustained by the victim and concluded that this was not a fit case for granting regular bail.

Facts:

The applicant was accused of conspiring with other individuals to lure the victim, Rajneesh Chaudhary, under the pretext of a financial deal involving the mortgaging of a Scorpio vehicle. Once the victim arrived at the designated location, the applicant’s co-conspirators attacked him with a cutter, inflicting grievous injuries on his neck, back, and waist. The applicant’s role involved contacting the victim and bringing him to the location of the assault. The incident was reported to the police, leading to the registration of the crime under the aforementioned sections of BNSS 2023.

Issues:

The primary issue before the court was whether the applicant should be granted regular bail, considering the gravity of the offence and his alleged role in the conspiracy.

Petitioner’s Arguments:

The petitioner, through his counsel, argued that he had been falsely implicated in the case. He maintained that he had only called the victim and was unaware that his co-accused possessed a knife or had intentions to harm the victim. Additionally, the petitioner emphasized that he was not directly involved in the physical assault, and his implication was solely based on the statement of the co-accused.

Respondent’s Arguments:

The state opposed the bail application, arguing that the petitioner played a pivotal role by luring the victim to the crime scene. The respondent emphasized that the injuries inflicted on the victim were grievous in nature and the petitioner was a key participant in the conspiracy, which warranted the denial of bail.

Analysis of the Law:

The court considered the provisions under Section 109 (abetment) and Section 3(5) (related to conspiracy and other offences) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The legal interpretation of these provisions, combined with the evidence presented, established the petitioner’s involvement in facilitating the attack.

Precedent Analysis:

The court referred to the legal principles surrounding bail in serious offences, particularly in cases involving grievous injury and conspiracy. Previous judgments indicated that bail should not be granted lightly in cases where the accused played a significant role in a conspiracy that led to violent outcomes.

Court’s Reasoning:

The court, after reviewing the case diary and evidence, concluded that the petitioner had a direct role in facilitating the crime by contacting the victim and leading him to the place of the incident. The severity of the injuries sustained by the victim and the grievous nature of the assault further solidified the court’s decision. The court stated that, given the gravity of the offence and the material available, it was not a fit case for bail.

Conclusion:

The bail application was rejected, and the court directed the trial to proceed expeditiously.

Implications:

The decision highlights the stringent approach taken by the courts in matters involving conspiracy and grievous harm. The judgment underscores the principle that individuals involved in facilitating serious offences, even if indirectly, may not be granted bail, especially when there is clear evidence of their involvement.

Also Read – Supreme Court Acquits Appellant Under Section 498-A IPC: Lack of Evidence in Alleged Dowry Harassment, Mere Familial Ties Insufficient for Conviction