1 2025:CGHC:25451 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3918 of 2025 Sanju Sahu S/o Mahendra Sahu Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Silhati Near Mandir Para P.S. Bodla Chowki, Podi District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Masturi, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Varun Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 18/06/2025 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. 213/2023 registered at Police Station Masturi, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 392, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Juga Bai Baghel, lodged a report at Police Station Masturi, alleging that on 26.04.2023, while she was working in her field, two persons arrived on a motorcycle, snatched her gold ornament, and fled the scene. Based on the report, an offence under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against unknown persons. During the course of investigation, the applicant was arrested. Hence, the bail application. 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 similarly situated co- accused, namely, Naresh Kumar Pandey has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07.05.2025 in MCRC No.3555/2025. The applicant is in jail since 05.07.2023, the applicant has two criminal antecedents of identical nature in which the applicant is on bail, 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 opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant alongwith another co-accused persons snatched gold ornament of complainant, when she was working on the field, and fled the scene, further applicant has two criminal antecedents of identical nature, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused 3 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 05.07.2023, the fact that the applicant is alleged to have snatched gold ornament of complainant, when she was working on the field, and fled the scene alongwith another co-accused person, but co-accused, namely, Naresh Kumar Pandey has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07.05.2025 in MCRC No.3555/2025 and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, applicant has two criminal antecedents of identical nature, in which he is on bail, 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-Sanju Sahu, involved in Crime No. 213/2023 registered at Police Station Masturi, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 392, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 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 4 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, 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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil