1 2025:CGHC:2787 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 398 of 2025 Akash @ Jhathka Chauhan S/o Manoj Chauhan Aged About 28 Years R/o Behind Fish Market, Supela, District- Durg C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Supela District- Durg C.G. ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ghanshyam Kashyap, Advocate. For Non-Applicant(s) : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/01/2025 1. 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 604/2024 registered at Police Station Supela District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code. AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Lavanya Bagh lodged report at Police Station Supela District- Durg (C.G.) alleging therein that she is working in Aziz Hotel, Junwani and on 24.05.2024 at about 10:30 am when she was going to hotel at that time one person with covered face came near her and snatched her bag, thereafter, the said person (applicant) thrown the bag and kept her mobile and cash Rs.500/- and fled away, on the basis of said report, aforesaid offence has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that the applicant is acquainted to each other and due to some previous animosity of complainant with the applicant, present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that the applicant is sole bread earner of his family and his long detention will adversely affect his and family members livelihood. The applicant is in jail since 25.05.2024, the applicant has 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 applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the applicant snatched bag of complainant and kept Rs.500/- and her mobile phone with him and fled away, further the 3 applicant has five criminal antecedents, out of which, four cases are of the year 2017 and one case is of the year 2018, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 25.05.2024, the fact that the allegation against the applicant that he snatched bag of complainant and kept Rs.500/- and her mobile phone with him and fled away, so far as the criminal antecedents is concerned, the applicant has five criminal antecedents of the years 2017 and 2018, which are old and stale, further charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant-Akash @ Jhathka Chauhan, involved in Crime No. 604/2024 registered at Police Station Supela District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 397 of IPC, 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. 4 (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, (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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil