1 2025:CGHC:11479 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1911 of 2025 Arvind Kumar S/o Naresh Prasad Soni Aged About 30 Years R/o- Pipardih, P.S.- Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad, (Bihar) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O. Police Station- Ramanujganj District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, (C.G.) ... Respondent For applicant : Shri Pushkar Sinha, Advocate. For Respondent : Shri Keshav Prasad Gupta, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07/03/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 176/2024 registered at Police Station GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.03.10 11:09:15 +0530 2 Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309 (6), 310 (6), 311, 312 of B.N.S. & 25, 27 of Arms Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Rajesh Kumar Soni whose jewelry shop is situated at Ramanujganj Gandhi Chowk made a report that on 11.09.2024 at noon some unknown persons looted gold and silver jewelers amounting to Rs. 2.85 crores and cash amount of seven lakhs rupees. During the investigation co accused Anand Soni, Monu Soni, Raj Soni, Rahul Mehta, Rohit Singh, Radheshyam, Vikki Singh, Anjali Ekka and present applicant also made an accused and FIR has been registered against applicant and other accused and they have been arrested for the offence u/s- 309 (6), 310 (6), 311, 312 of B.N.S & 25, 27 of Arms Act. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent. He further submits that the identically situated co- accused person, namely, Anjani Ekka has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 8.01.2025 in MCRC No.8173/2024. The applicant is in jail since 01.10.2024, charge- sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail 3 application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He do not dispute the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent. He further submits that applicant alongwith other co-accused persons have entered into the jewelry shop of the complainant and looted gold and silver jewelers amounting to Rs. 2.85 crores and cash amount of seven lakhs rupees, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 01.10.2024, the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and one of the identically situated co-accused person, namely, Anjani Ekka has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 8.01.2025 in MCRC No.8173/2024, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant-Arvind Kumar, involved in Crime No. 176/2024 registered at Police Station Ramanujganj, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309 (6), 310 (6), 311, 312 of B.N.S. & 25, 27 of Arms Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (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 5 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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri