1 2025:CGHC:32076 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5388 of 2025 Praveen Masih Urf Babi S/o Chandra Bhan Masih, Aged About 19 Years R/o - Bhathagaon B.S.U.P Colony Quarter No. 10/14 P.S. Purani Basti, District- Raipur (C.G.) (As Per Challan) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh (Through P.S. - Kharora, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ashish Gangwani, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/07/2025 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. 68/2025 registered at Police Station- Kharora, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A), 3(5) of the B.N.S. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant presently live in Uma Rice Mill Village Pikridih. He has a grocery shop 100 KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 meters away from the gate of Uma Rice Mill, which he run himself, which sells cigarettes, gutkha, beedis, mobile items. On 04/02/2025 at 8.30 pm, he locked his grocery shop and went to the house given to him by the company. On 05.02.2025 at 7.00 am, when Gopal Yadav went to sweep as usual, he saw that the shutter of the shop was broken. He came to him and told him that the shutter of the shop was broken thereafter, when he went to the shop and looked inside, he found that some unknown thief had stolen goods worth Rs. 35,000/- including cigarettes, gutkha, bidi, biscuits, mobile accessories, DVR and cash amounting to ten thousand rupees by breaking the shutter between 11.30 am and 7.00 pm. On the basis of the above complaint, the Police Station Kharora, District Raipur registered a case against the unknown persons. During the course of investigation, the accused Ankit Vibhar, Arif alias Sonu, Praveen Masih/applicant, Himachal Pulast alias Saurabh were arrested on 22-03-2025 after recording their confessions and taking seizure action in the case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant not acted in the manner as it is alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that the co-accused persons of this case have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No.4738/2025 vide order dated 20.06.2025 and MCRC No.5041/2025 vide order dated 01.07.2025 and the case of the present applicant is similar to the case of other co-accused persons, who have been granted by this Court. He further submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has four previous 3 criminal antecedents and all cases have been disposed of which has been explained in the bail application of para No. 4(A) and he is in jail since 22.03.2025 and the conclusion of the trials is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant has four criminal antecedents and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court however the fact that two co-accused have been granted bail by this Court. Accordingly, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 22.03.2025 and the recovery made from the applicant and further the fact that co-accused namely Ankit Vibhar and Arif Kureshi have already been granted bail by this Court being in MCRC No.4738/2025 vide order dated 20.06.2025 and MCRC No.5041/2025 vide order dated 01.07.2025 and the case of the present applicant is similar to the case of co-accused persons, who have been granted by this Court and in the present case, charge- sheet has been filed before the competent Court further the applicant has four criminal antecedents and all cases have been disposed off which has been explained in the bail application of para No. 4(A), thus, without further commenting anything on 4 merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Let the applicant – Praveen Masih Urf Babi, involved in Crime No. 68/2025 registered at Police Station- Kharora, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A), 3(5) of the B.N.S, be released on bail on his 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. (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. 5 (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. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal