1 2025:CGHC:11804 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1949 of 2025 Shubham Kumar S/o Vinod Kumar Aged About 26 Years R/o Maharani Ward No. 14 Bodhghat Jagdalpur Distt. Bastar C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through PS. Kotwali Jagdalpur Distt Bastar C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Vikas A. Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/03/2025 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. 473/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali Jagdalpur Distt Bastar (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(6), 3(5) and 311 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that in the night of 13.10.2024, AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 when the complainant was heading towards Dalpat Sagar, the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons came and allegedly looted him and his friend, they have stolen two mobile phones and Rs.5,500/- in case, on the basis of alleged incident, aforesaid offence has been registered against the applicant and subsequently he was arrested. 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 further submits that one of the identically situated co-accused, namely, Mohd. Akbar Khan has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated12.02.2025 in MCRC No.1210/2025. The applicant is in jail since 19.10.2024, the applicant has two criminal antecedents of identical nature, in which, he has been granted bail by the learned trial Court, further 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 application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that applicant alongwith other co- accused persons were alleged to have committed loot on complainant and his friend, they have stolen two mobile phones and Rs.5,500/- from them, 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, 3 nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 19.10.2024, the fact that though the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons were alleged to have committed loot on complainant and his friend, they have stolen two mobile phones and Rs.5,500/- from them, but one of the co-accused person, namely, Mohd. Akbar Khan has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated12.02.2025 in MCRC No.1210/2025 and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused, so far as criminal antecedent of the applicant is concerned, applicant has two criminal antecedents of identical nature, in which, applicant has been granted bail by the trial Court and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant-Shubham Kumar, involved in Crime No. 473/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali Jagdalpur Distt Bastar (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(6), 3(5) and 311 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 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 4 court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient 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 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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil