Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 31196 (CHH)

MILAN MANDAL v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/5370/2025 · 2025-07-09

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:32096 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5370 of 2025 1 - Milan Mandal S/o Mujmil Mandal Aged About 40 Years R/o Mujmil Mandal Mughol Road, Avti Gali, Jamkhandi, Distt. Bagalkot, Karnataka Pin 587301 At Present Address Super Lodge Saraypali, Tahsil - Saraypali, Distt. Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 2 - Moh. Shafik Shekh @Babu Shekh S/o Moh. Idrish Shekh @ Aamir Shekh Aged About 43 Years R/o Ward No. 28 Near Datri Masjid, Darbar Gali, Bijapur, Vijaypur, Karnataka Other Address - Near Malda Station, Village Bhojpur, Thana - English Bazar, Distt. Malda (West Bengal ) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station House Officer Thana- Basna, District – Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Deepak Jain, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.07.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants arrested in connection with Crime No. 26/2025 registered at Police Station – Basna, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 332(C) and 350(A) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Dinesh Kumar Agrawal lodged a report at Police Station concerned that on 09.01.2025, he had gone to Nagpur with his family, after locking the main door of the house residing in Jagdishpur Road Basna, on 12.01.2025, when he returned, he found that that the latch of the the main door was broken, he found the contents of the gold jewelry and 05 lakh cash were stolen by some unknown thief, on the report of the complainant, FIR was lodged to the Police Station concerned and the applicant along with the co-accused persons were arrested. Hence, this application. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. The applicant is in jail since 08.04.2025, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that from the perusal of the case-diary it transpires that the applicant along with the co-accused persons are said to have committed theft of gold and silver ornaments from the house of the complainant, and the bail application of the co-accused person has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 04.07.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4514/2025. As such, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, and from the perusal of the case-diary it transpires that the applicant along with the co-accused persons are said to have committed theft of gold and silver ornaments from the house of the complainant, and the bail application of the co-accused person has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 04.07.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4514/2025, thus, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, this first bail application of applicants – Milan Mandal and Moh. Shafik Shekh @Babu Shekh involved in Crime No. 26/2025 registered at Police Station – Basna, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 332(C) and 350(A) of the BNS, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the learned trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 9. 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 Rajshekhar