1 2025:CGHC:20971 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3511 of 2025 Deshmukh @ Debu Yadav S/o Ishwar Yadav Aged About 18 Years R/o House No. 115, Ward No. 25, Jagjivan Ward, Dalli Rajgara (M), Balod Chhattisgarh, Pin 491228. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Dalli Rajhara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Adv. General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07/05/2025 1. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has already cured the defect as pointed out by the Registry. 2. In that view of the matter, the defect pointed out by the Registry is overruled. 3. This is the First 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. 322/2024 registered at Police Station- Dalli Rajhara District- KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Balod (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A), 3(5) of BNS. 4. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Mahendra Pratap Maurya on 08.11.2024 at about 07:30 in the evening went to Meera Datar situated at Village Jungera with his family and gave keys of his house to his neighbor Savitri Yadav and on 09.11.2024 and 10.11.2024 he came in rounds to ensure that his house is safe. On 12.11.2024 at about 8 A.M. in the morning his neighbor called the complainant and stated that some has broken the door and open the house and committed theft in his house. Thereafter, the complainant as soon as went to his house and saw the house and his wife informed that some unknown persons have committed theft in the house and have looted gold and silver ornaments worth of Rs. 6, 23, 600/-. On the basis of such, the Police authorities have lodged the FIR against unknown person and started investigation, during the course of investigation, suspicion was raised upon present applicant and upon the memorandum statement, some gold and silver ornaments have been seized and after completion of investigation the police authorities have filed charge-sheet and the present applicant was arrested. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the true and correct facts of the present crime is different from the case of prosecution, the present applicant has been falsely implicated and he has no involvement in the present crime. The prosecution has failed to link the present applicant from 3 the above theft and only on the basis of suspicion, the present applicant has been roped in as an accused. Further, no TIP has been conducted by the prosecution and after completion of investigation the charge-sheet has been filed and the present applicant has no previous criminal records of same nature. He further submits that the mother of the present applicant is suffering from the old age ailment and the present applicant is the sole earning member of the family to cater her medical needs as there is no one to look after her and he is in jail since 12.11.2024 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that from perusal of the case diary, prima facie it appears that the accused/applicant, in collusion with another accused, committed theft of gold and silver ornaments worth Rs. 6,23,600/- from the house of the complainant, Mahendra Pratap Maurya. The involvement of the accused/applicant in the said offence is prima facie evident. He further submits that the applicant has a previous criminal antecedent, as indicated in Crime No. 205/2024 at Police Station Rajhara. Accordingly, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, recovery made from the applicant, period of 4 detention of the applicant since 12.11.2024 and the fact that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has only one previous criminal antecedent, in which he is on bail and no further interrogation is required and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without further commenting anything merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 9. Let the applicant – Deshmukh @ Debu Yadav, involved in Crime No. 322/2024 registered at Police Station- Dalli Rajhara District- Balod (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A), 3(5) of BNS.. be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 sufficient 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 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. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal