1 2025:CGHC:23586 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4346 of 2025 Sonu Rai @ Hallu S/o Shri Keshav Prasad Rai, Aged About 32 Years R/o Ganesh Ganj, Sahipur, Sanoda, Distrcit Sagar (M.P.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Gandhinagar, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.06 .202 5 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application 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 - 56/2025, registered at Police Station – Gandhinagar, District Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 140(1) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the case of prosecution, the report has been lodged by Inder Sai Maravi against unknown persons mentioning that his son, namely, Dinesh PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.06.13 15:22:47 +0530 2 Maravi aged about 28 years and Kabil Ansari aged about 31 years were abducted and travelled through train and the accused persons demanded ransom so on the basis of the said report, FIR was registered and after completion of investigation charge-sheet has been filed. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the compromise has been taken place between the parties. He further submits that the co-accused persons, namely, Shahid Khan, Rashid Khand and Mukesh Dubey, have already been granted bail by the Court in MCRC Nos. 2932/2025 and 3095/2025 vide order dated 15.05.2025 respectively. It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. He also submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 22.01.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant but could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused person. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the compromise has been taken place between the parties, further the co-accused persons, namely, Shahid Khan, Rashid Khand and Mukesh Dubey, have already been granted bail by the Court in MCRC Nos. 3 2932/2025 and 3095/2025 vide order dated 15.05.2025 respectively, further the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 22.01.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Sonu Rai @ Hallu, involved in Crime No - 56/2025, registered at Police Station – Gandhinagar, District Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 140(1) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local 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 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 4 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 Preeti