1 2025:CGHC:10573 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1745 of 2025 Krishna Sah @ Kanhaiya S/o Ayodhaya Sah Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Moti Jharna, Mahrajpur, P.S. Taljhari, District Sahebganj (Jharkhand) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station House OfÏcer, P.S. Navagarh, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Varunendra Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State. : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 04.03.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 88/2024 registered at Police Station Navagarh, District – Janjgir - Champa (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 379, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. As per the prosecution's story, in brief, it is stated that on March 11, 2024, the complainant, Mukesh Chandra, appeared before the ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.03.05 16:47:20 +0530 2 police station and reported that on March 6, 2024, at around 5:00 PM, while returning from the Budhwari vegetable market, an unknown person stole his mobile phone from his possession. Consequently, the police registered an offense under Sections 379 and 34 of the IPC and arrested the present applicant for the aforementioned offense. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned case. He submits that the applicant has neither committed nor participated in any such act, which may amount to any of the offences, mentioned above. He further submits that on the basis of memorandum dated 13.03.2024 the police has made a false case against the applicant which is not admissible, although the applicant has been implicated in the false case. He also submits that the applicant has 03 criminal antecedents for which he has given explanation in the present bail application. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 02.05.2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge - sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. She further submits that the present applicant has 03 criminal antecedents under the IPC, which goes to show that the present applicant is habitual offender, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the present applicant has 03 criminal antecedents for which he has already been given explanation in the present bail application. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case, and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 02.05.2024, and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Krishna Sah @ Kanhaiya, involved in Crime No. 88/2024 registered at Police Station Navagarh, District – Janjgir - Champa (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 379, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 4 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 sufÏcient 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. OfÏce 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 Abhishek