1 2025:CGHC:31052 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5120 of 2025 • Rikesh Mehar S/o Raju Mehar Aged About 22 Years R/o Ravanbhatha Thakkar Bapa Ward Mungeli, Police Station City Kotwali Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Vikrant Pillay, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Laywer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07/07/2025 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. 85/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali District Mungeli (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 305, 331(4), 317(2) and 3(5) of the BNS 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that 05. on 12.03.2025 the complainant lodged a report against unknown persons regarding the theft of cable wire, 2 submersible pump, breaker machine, ceiling fan, and other articles from the Nagar Palika godown at Krishi Upaj VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA 2 Mandi, Mungeli. Based on suspicion, the police arrested co-accused persons, recorded their confessional statements, and pursuant to those statements, arrested the applicant and seized a Bike allegedly used for committing the theft. On basis of the above facts and circumstances, a crime has been registered against the applicant/accused and other accused for offence punishable under section 305, 331(4) 317(2), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no recovery has been made by the prosecution to connect the applicant with the aforesaid offence. It is alleged by the learned counsel for the applicant is that only on the basis of memorandum statement of the co-accused, present applicant has been implicated in the case. He also submits that the applicant has one criminal antecedent in Crime No.278 of 2024 under Sections 303(2), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, which is pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mungeli (C.G.). He lastly submits that co-accused namely Ajay Yadav has already been enlarge on bail by this Court in MCRC No.2700 of 2025 by its order dated 06.05.2025. The applicant is in jail since 14.03.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has one criminal antecedents at Crime No.278 of 2024 under Sections 303(2), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, which is pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mungeli (C.G.), therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 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 co-accused namely Ajay Yadav has already been enlarge on bail by this Court in MCRC No.2700 of 2025 by its order dated 06.05.2025. The applicant is in jail since 14.03.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the applicant -Rikesh Mehar, involved in crime No. 85/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali District Mungeli (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 305, 331(4), 317(2) and 3(5) of the BNS 2023., be released on bail on their 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 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. 4 (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 forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali