1 2025:CGHC:25066 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4540 of 2025 Junaid Malik S/o Mr. Anwar Malik Aged About 29 Years R/o Haruda, Hapud, P.S. Simmavali, Dist. Hapud (U.P.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Makdi, Dist. Kondagaon ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Raza Ali, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State. : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17.06.2025 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.01/2025 registered at Police Station Makdi, District – Kondagaon (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 303(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case in brief is that, on dated 19.01.2025 a complaint has been made with regard to the incidence of 15.01.2024 and averments that VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.06.18 18:28:34 +0530 2 on dated 15.01.2024 from the ZIO tower the battery from ODC Box was stolen which is about 1,80,000/-and similar incidence during the said period was happened in four other places of three districts and based on the said complaint the police has found that accused Gautam has committed the said offences being the Engineer of the Zio Company and from whom the battery was seized and based on his memorandum, the present applicant and other person has been arrested and fives offences has been registered. The version of the applicant is that the applicant has not committed any offences and has been falsely implicated in the offences. It is pertinent to mention here that no any stolen battery was seized from the applicant and apart from the memorandum of the main accused no any other material against the applicant. Further the incidence is of January 2024 and complaint made in 2025 and the same was not against the applicant and for the same incidence the four offences applicant has been released on bail from the trial court. Further the law point involved in the present case is that the offences is under section 303 of BNS and for which the stolen of property must be from the possession of the complainant and in the present case the tower from which the battery was stolen and the place where the tower was located does not belongs to the Zio Company and even no such documents has been filed by the prosecution to established the said facts and therefore it cannot be said that the any battery was stolen from the possession of the complainant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is 3 an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned case. He submits that the applicant has been implicated on the basis of the memorandum statement of the main accused and even no any battery was seized from the applicant. He also submits that there are total 4 criminal cases registered against the applicant apart from the present case, all these cases are registered on the basis of one incidence committed by the accused Gautam at different district and on his memorandum the present applicant and others has been implicated. The four cases are Crime number 03/2025 of P.S. Kodear, Dist. Bastar, Crime number 10/2025 P.S. Narharpur Dist. Kanker, Crime number 10/2025 P.S. Kanker Dist. Kanker and Crime number 64/2025 P.S. Kanker Dist. Kanker and in all these cases the applicant has already been enlarged on bail by the trial court. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 04.04.2025, 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. He further submits that the present applicant has 04 criminal antecedents, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Counsel for the applicant submits that there are five cases registered 4 against the applicant simultaneously and four cases he has already been granted bail by the trial Court, copy of the same has been enclosed with the covering memo which is on record and in the present case there has been no seizure, the battery which was used in the jio tower was seized from the car which did not belong to the applicant and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 04.04.2025, and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant –Junaid Malik, involved in Crime No.01/2025 registered at Police Station Makdi, District – Kondagaon (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 303(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023., 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. (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 5 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 vaibhav