1 2025:CGHC:12336 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2036 of 2025 1 - Vinod Vasudev S/o Sukhiram Aged About 32 Years Caste- Vasudeo, R/o Village Gadapali, Police Station Urga, District Korba (C.G.), 2 - Ved Prakash @ Golu S/o Dhan Prasad Vasudeo Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Gadapali, Police Station Urga, District Korba (C.G.), ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Ishwar Jaiswal, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.03.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 342/2024, registered at Police Station : Sakti, District- Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 331(3), 305(A), 317(2), 61(2)(A) 62, read with Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (as per charge-sheet). KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief is that the complainant namely Pawan Kumar lodged the complaint on 12-09-2024 with the averment that someone entered into his house for commission of theft and broken the lock and committed the theft of golden and silver ornament amounting to Rs.38000/-. During the investigation, the present applicants and other co- accused persons have been arrested on the memorandum and after the competition of the investigation, charge sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that on the basis of memorandum, the present applicants were arrested in the present crime number and seizure has been made, which is doubtful. He also submits that the applicants are not knowing about the other co-accused persons and all the accused persons are residents of different-different places, except the present applicants and on implication in one case, which is relating of theft, the other offence has been registered against the applicants and they have been arrested. The seizure which has been made in the present case has been used in different-different crime number which was registered in different-different police station and therefore the case of prosecution is itself suspicious and doubtful and further the FIR has been registered against unknown person and the applicants are not named in the FIR. He further submits that out of 13 cases registered against the present applicants, the trial court itself granted benefit of regular bail in 02 cases to the present applicants and in one case this Court has 3 granted benefit of regular bail to the applicants in other crime numbers. He also submits that in the present crime number, one of the co-accused has been granted benefit of regular bail by this Court in MCRC No.760/2025 & 843/2025 vide order dated 28-01- 2025 and 30-01-2025 and the the applicants are in jail since 30.10.2024 and charge sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court however, looking to the seriousness of this case, the present applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 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, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that the co-accused person namely, Deepak Soni has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 631/2025, vide order dated 28.02.2025 and so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, out of 13 cases registered against the present applicants for the similar offence, the trial Court has granted bail in 02 cases to the present applicants and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court therefore, I am inclined to grant bail to the present applicants. 7. Let applicants, Vinod Vasudev and Ved Prakash @ Golu, involved in Crime No. 342/2024, registered at Police Station : Sakti, 4 District- Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 331(3), 305(A), 317(2), 61(2)(A) 62, read with Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (as per charge-sheet), be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, 5 (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 applicants is deliberated 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 them 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/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal