1 2025:CGHC:18365 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3081 of 2025 1 - Vikkey Singh S/o Yogendra Singh Aged About 21 Years R/o- Guja, P.S.- N.T.P.C., Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad, (Bihar) 2 - Rohit Kumar Singh S/o Manoj Singh Aged About 22 Years R/o- Jamua, P.S.- Kutumba, Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad, (Bihar) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O., Police Station- Ramanujganj District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23/04/2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 176/2024 registered at Police Station Ramanujganj District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 offence punishable under Sections 309(6), 310(6), 311, 312 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, namely, Rajesh Kumar Soni whose jewelry shop is situated at Ramanujganj Gandhi Chowk, on 11.09.2024 at noon some unknown persons looted gold and silver jewelries amounting Rs. 2.85 crores and cash amount of seven lakhs rupees, thereafter, aforesaid offence has been registered against the unknown persons and during investigation present applicants were arrested and on the basis of their memorandum statement co-accused Anand Soni, Monu Soni, Raj Soni, Rahul Mehta, Radheshyam, Anjali Ekka were also arrested. Hence, the bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that two of the identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Anjani Ekka and Arvind Kumar have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 08.01.2025 and 07.03.2025 in MCRC No.8173/2024 and MCRC No.1911/2025. The applicants are in jail since, applicant No.1 – 01.10.2024 and applicant No.2 – 09.10.2024, the applicants have no criminal antecedent, 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 applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the 3 present case. She further submits that the applicants alongwith other co-accused persons are alleged to have committed theft in the shop of complainant and had stolen gold and silver jewelries amounting Rs. 2.85 crores and cash amount of seven lakhs rupees, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicants since applicant No.1 – 01.10.2024 and applicant No.2 – 09.10.2024, the fact that though the applicants alongwith other co- accused persons are alleged to have committed theft in the shop of complainant and had stolen gold and silver jewelries amounting Rs. 2.85 crores and cash amount of seven lakhs rupees, but they have no criminal antecedents and two of the co-accused persons, namely, have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 08.01.2025 and 07.03.2025 in MCRC No.8173/2024 and MCRC No.1911/2025, further charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicants-Vikkey Singh and Rohit Kumar Singh, 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 BNS and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties each in 4 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 misuse 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, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion 5 of the trial court absence of the applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 9. 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