1 2025:CGHC:28297 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4613 of 2025 Shankar Sahu S/o Awadhram Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Indira Nagar, Near Hanuman Temple, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sho, Police Station Padmanabhpur, District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Shikhar Bakhtiyar, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State. : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 26.06.2025 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. 14/2025 registered at Police Station- Padmanabhpur District – Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2),111(1),3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per prosecution story that, the complainant Santosh Dewangan lodged a report at Police Station Padmanabhpur on 10.01.2025, stating VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.06.27 20:12:10 +0530 2 that he is a contractor of the construction work and he was one concrete mixture machine for executing the said work. On 04/07/2024 at around 8:00 PM, after the day's work, the complainant left his concrete mixture machine at the Rajendra Park Chowk. The next morning, i.e., on 05/07/2024 at around 9:00AM, his driver Purshottam bandhe has informed him that mixture machine missing and thus the police registered an FIR and filed a charge-sheet against the present applicant Shankar Sahu and other co-accused for offences punishable under Sections 303(2), 111(1), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned case. He submits that the applicant has no role in the alleged theft of the concrete mixture machine, nor does any direct evidence exist which may connect him to the commission of the offence and there is an inordinate delay of more than two months in registration of the FIR and the FIR was initially registered against unknown persons and the applicant is in jail since 12.01.2025, 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. She further submits that the present applicant is allegedly involved in the theft, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case 3 diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case. Moreover, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and no incriminating articles have been seized from the possession of the present applicant and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 12.01.2025 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. Let the Applicant – Shankar Sahu , involved in Crime No. 14/2025 registered at Police Station- Padmanabhpur District – Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2),111(1),3(5) 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 Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 4 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