1 2025:CGHC:22045 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3719 of 2025 • Sheikh Arman, S/o Abdul Sattar, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Near Gurudwara Kaku Paan Thela, Sunder Nagar, Camp, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Chhavani, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Aman Pandey, Advocate. For State/Non- applicant : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13/05/2025 1. 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.36/2025 registered at Police Station Chaavani, District Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). DEEPTI JHA NIRALA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA NIRALA 2 2. The prosecution's story, in brief, is that the complainant, Santosh Baghel lodged a written report at Police Station Chaavani, District Durg (C.G.) stating inter alia that present applicant and co-accused namely Brucely stopped him near Sunder Tent House and demanded money from him, which was objected by him, upon which the present applicant caught hold the hands of complainant and co-accused Brucely looted the phone from his pocket and ran away from the spot. Subsequently, the police of Chaavani Police Station registered the crime bearing Crime No.36/2025 under Sections 309(4), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). During the investigation, the applicant was arrested on 20.01.2025 and the final report has also been submitted to the concerned trial Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the foresaid crime case. He further submits that no recovery of any incriminating article has been made from the possession of the applicant, as the two mobiles were recovered from the possession of the co-accused namely Brucely, who is having criminal antecedents and so far as the applicant is concerned, he is having only criminal antecedent of the year 2025. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 20.01.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and one criminal antecedent against the present applicant has been found, 3 therefore, he may not be enlarged on regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and further the fact that the applicant has 1 criminal antecedent under Section 294 of IPC, which is pending trial. Further considering the fact that no incriminating article has been seized from the possession of the present applicant, though, two mobiles has been seized from the possession of co-accused namely Brucely. Also considering the fact that the charge sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 20.01.2025, and conclusion of the trial may take some more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant/Sheikh Arman, involved in Crime No.36/2025 registered at Police Station Chaavani, District Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), be released on bail on furnishing 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 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. 8. 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