1 2025:CGHC:21764 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3476 of 2025 1 - Amarjeet Kumar S/o Shri Shankardas Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Bharari, Thana Sherghati, Bar Husainganj, District Gaya, Bihar-824211 ... Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station City Kotwali Raigarh District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rajveev Shrivastava, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Diwesh Kumar, Advocate and Ms. Ritika Dubey, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, Government Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 09/05/2025 1. This is the third bail application filed by the applicant. The second bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 12.11.2024 in M.Cr.C. No. 6373/2024. 2. This bail application is filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 696/2023 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District – Raigarh, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 342, 450, 394, 397, 120-B of SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY 2 the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 (as per charge-sheet). 3. Case of prosecution is that, on 19.09.2023, some persons entered into the Axis Bank, Raigarh, have committed robbery and ran away. Incident was reported to the concerned police station and it was circulated to the entire border areas of the State. When applicant was travelling through Ramanujganj by car, his car was intercepted by police and on suspicion, he was taken to police station and thereafter, he was arrested. His memorandum statement was also recorded. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the crime. He has not committed any offence as alleged. He submits that this third bail application is filed on the ground of delay in trial. He contended that one of the co-accused namely, Upendra @ Upendra Singh has been enlarged on bail in M.Cr.C. No. 8528/2024 vide order dated 05.12.2024. He also contended that the applicant is in jail since 20.09.2023 and hence, he has completed more than 1 ½ years of pre-trial detention. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the counsel for the applicant and would submit that according to the seizure memo, police during the course of investigation has seized about Rs. 11,20,000/- from the possession of the applicant. Hence, he is not entitled for bail. He further submits that as per the instructions received, till date, 11 witnesses out of 72 witnesses have already been examined and the trial is in progress. 6. At this stage, learned senior counsel for the applicant would submit that the seizure of the alleged notes from the material available in the charge- sheet does not show that the seizure is made from the exclusive possession of the applicant. However, from the material available in the 3 charge-sheet, it is appearing that the notes were seized from the Creta Car on which, the applicant was also traveling along with other co- accused persons. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents filed along with the bail application. 8. Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submission of learned counsel for the respective parties, period of pre-trial detention and further considering that till date, only 11 witnesses out of 72 witnesses have been examined before the learned Trial Court, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application for grant of bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is allowed and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of Trial Court concerned on the conditions that: (a) 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. (b) 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. (c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial andin order to secure her 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. (d) 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 4 be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. Sd/-Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey