1 2025:CGHC:12834 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2101 of 2025 Nilesh Baghel S/o Shri Rajkumar Baghel Aged About 27 Years R/o R.D.A. Colony, P.S.- Boriakhurd, S. Block, House No. 30, Thana- Tikrapara, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Police Of Police Station- Tikrapara,district- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Mahesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 18.03.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 960/2024, registered at Police Station : Tikrapara District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief is that the complainant Rajni Nande lodge a report before the concerned police station with the KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 averment that on 09/12/2024 when his husband had gone to the medical college due to which complainant was alone in the shop, at round 02.30 in the afternoon, a person wearing a red T-shirt and a red cap came to the shop and said that he wanted to see sarees. Then another person came and said that he would come in the evening as he had not made the online payment. After the man wearing a red T- shirt and a red cap also left. After a while, at around 02.45 in the afternoon, the same boy wearing a red T-shirt and a red cap came again and said that he wanted to buy 5-6 sarees. The complainant took him to the cloth seller’s room on the second floor of her shop and was showing him sarees. Suddenly, the man took out a knife from his waist and threatened to kill her and attacked her with knife. The complainant resisted and stopped him with her hands and sustained injuries in her fingers, thumb and wrists of both her hands and blood oozed out. The accused robbed the gold mangalsutra worn around the neck of the complainant and fled from there. During investigation of the case, accused Nilesh Baghel, who had entered the shop of the applicant, the complainant after the man wearing a red T-shirt and left the clothes there saying that he will buy in the evening when online payment was not made, the man wearing red T-shirt, had conspired with Ashish was waiting outside in his Vigo bearing number CG-04-CX-4844 and the man wearing red T- shirt and cap, accused Nilesh's friend Ashish, ran away after robbing the mangalsutra by attacking with knife and mortgaging the looted property in Manapruam Gold Loan for Rs. 20,000/-, divided the sale amount equally. 20,000/-, divided the sale amount equally. During interrogation, on 3 the basis of the photo received from Manapuram Gold Loan, the accused was traced and on the basis of memorandum, the property looted in crime was seized from accused and accused Nilesh Baghel was arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this offence and there is no incriminating material against the applicant, which held his guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section offences mentioned in the opening paragraph. He further submits that even assuming the case of prosecution, no offence like section 309 (4) of B.N.S. has been made out as leveled against the present applicant and as per the opinion of the doctor, the complainant had sustained simple injuries. He further submits that the present applicant had not assaulted the complainant. As per the story of the prosecution, co-accused Ashish who is absconding in the case has attacked with knife and snatched the mangalsutra from complainant. He also submit that the prosecution has not made the compliance of provision contained in the section 7 of B.N.S. to ascertain the identity of mangalsutra alleged to be snatch from the complainant and the applicant is in jail since 21.12.2024 and further he has no previous criminal antecedent and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that during the investigation, the applicant/accused Nilesh Baghel's memorandum 4 statement was recorded. In his statement, he mentioned that he and Ashish had conspired to commit the robbery. Ashish allegedly injured Rajni Nande with a sharp-edged knife and stolen her mangalsutra. The mangalsutra was then pawned at Manappuram Gold Loan for Rs 20,000/- and the proceeds were split equally between them. Based on statement, the Manappuram Finance Limited pawn receipt and a moped were seized from the present applicant-Nilesh Baghel further, two gold lockets weighing 5.300 grams were also seized. Looking to the seriousness of this case, the present applicant is 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 applicant and the recovery made from the applicant, the fact that the applicant/accused, in collusion with co-accused Ashish, allegedly committed robbery with the intention of causing harm and the co- accused assaulted with a sharp-edged knife by entering the house of the complainant, caused injury and looted her gold mangalsutra and further the fact that the co-accused Ashish is still absconding, considering the circumstances of the case that the case of the present applicant is distinguishable from that case of co-accused who assaulted the complainant and the present applicant is in jail since 21.12.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 5 7. Let applicant, Nilesh Baghel, involved in Crime No. 960/2024, registered at Police Station : Tikrapara District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, be released on bail on furnishing 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 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, 6 (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 Kunal