1 2025:CGHC:22079 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2932 of 2025 1 Shahid Khan S/o Ayub Khan Aged About 34 Years R/o Nagar Palika Pathariya Damoh, Madhya Pradesh. 2 Rashid Khan S/o Udit Khan Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Botrai, P.S. Pathariya Damoh, Madhya Pradesh. --- Applicant(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Gandhinagar, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. --- Non-Applicant(s) MCRC No. 3095 of 2025 1 Mukesh Dubey S/o Late Ram Sevak Dubey @ Tunde Aged About 31 Years R/o Tada Shahpur, Sagar (M.P.) ---Applicant(s) Versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Gandhinagar, Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant(s) For Applicants : Ms. Sangeeta Soni, Advocate through 2 V.C. in McrC No.2932 of 2025 Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate in McrC No.3095 of 2025. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Ajit Singh, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.05.2025 1. Since both the bail applications arising out of same crime i.e. Cr.No.56/2025, they are being considered and decided by this common order. 2. The applicants have filed these bail applications under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 56/2025 registered at Police Station Gandhinagar Sarguja (C.G) for the offences punishable under Sections 61(1), 318(4), 140(1), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 (in respect of applicants in MCrC No.2932 of 2025) and Sections 140(1), 3(5) of the BNS (in respect of applicant in MCrC No.3095 of 2025) 3. The prosecution's story is that the applicants kidnapped one Dinesh Maravi and demanded money from the complainant, who is the father of the victim, thus the complaint has been lodged against the applicants under the aforesaid Sections of the BNS, 2023. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated 3 in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the parties have compromised their dispute and the consent letter dated 11.03.2025 has also been filed and no ransom money has been paid. Learned counsel also submits that the present applicants have no criminal antecedents in State of Madya Pradesh under the IPC of the year 2023. He further submits that the present applicants are in jail since 22.01.2025, and conclusion of the trial may take some time, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicants. 5. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that the charge- sheet has been filed in the present case. 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 that the present applicants have no criminal antecedent under the IPC, in which the applicants are on bail. Moreover, the parties have already entered into compromise and in this regard consent letter has also been filed and also the fact that the charge - sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and they are in jail since 22.01.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 4 8. Accordingly, both the applications are allowed. Let the Applicants – Shahid Khan, Rashid Khan (in MCrC No.2932 of 2025) and Mukesh Dubey (in MCrC No.3095 of 2025) involved in Crime No. 56/ 2025 registered at Police Station Gandhinagar Sarguja (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 61(1), 318(4), 140(1), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 (in respect of applicants in MCrC No.2932 of 2025) and Sections 140(1), 3(5) of the BNS (in respect of applicant in MCrC No.3095 of 2025), be released on bail on each of them furnishing personal bond with two sureties 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 his counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail 5 during trial and in order to secure his 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, (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 default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. Office 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 Jyoti