1 2025:CGHC:15656 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2653 of 2025 Radheshyam Kumar @ Shyam Paswan S/o Pramod Paswan Aged About 22 Years R/o Badkagaon, Police Station - Amba, District- Aurangabad (Bihar) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.04.2025 1. This is the Second 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. 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 the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 2168 ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.04.04 11:31:17 +0530 2 of 2025 was dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to file afresh due to various defects as pointed out by the Registry of this Court. 3. The prosecution's case, in brief, is that on 11.09.2024, complainant Rajesh Kumar Soni lodged a report at the Ramanujganj Police Station, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj. He alleged that he owns a jewelry shop called Rajesh Jewellers in front of Gandhi Stadium at Ramanujganj. On the day of the incident, at around 1:15 pm, three unknown persons carrying pistols entered the shop. One of the co- accused persons assaulted the complainant on the head with a pistol, causing blood to ooze out. The other two persons entered the counter and subsequently the locker, which had its key attached, allowing them to easily loot gold chains, rings, necklaces, and other ornaments, as well as cash amounting to Rs. 7 lakh in a yellow bag. They then escaped. During the incident, one of the accused persons inquired about a person named Daulat, to which the complainant replied that he is his brother. The accused person then threatened to murder both of them. At the time of the incident, two customers, Laleshwar Gupta and his wife from Village Chaki, were present in the shop and witnessed the incident. The accused persons also snatched a chain and ring from the customers and took one of the complainant's mobile phones. The stolen jewelry was valued at approximately Rs. 2.85 crores. According to the application, one of the accused persons had a small beard and a heavy build, another wore a red napkin and was bald, and the third had a half-shirt and a fit, healthy body. The police registered an offense bearing Crime No. 176/2024 on 11.09.2024, under Section 3 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act against three unknown persons. During the investigation, the present applicant was taken into custody based on the memorandum statement of other co-accused persons. Some ornaments and cash amounting to Rs. 10,000/- were recovered from the applicant's possession. The police arrested the applicant and other co-accused persons. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the bail application of the other co- accused person, namely, Arvind Kumar vide order dated 07.03.2025 in MCRC No. 1911 of 2025 has already been granted regular bail by this Hon’ble Court. Therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 5. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She submits that the applicant, along with other co-accused persons, looted the complainant's jewelry shop, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case as the other co-accused persons, namely, Arvind Kumar vide order dated 07.03.2025 in MCRC No. 1911 of 2025 has already been granted regular bail by this Hon’ble Court, further the fact that the 4 charge - sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has been in jail since 09.10.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 8. Let the Second Bail of the Applicant – Radheshyam Kumar @ Shyam Paswan, 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 the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 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 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, 5 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. 9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of six months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 10. 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