1 2025:CGHC:39966 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5600 of 2025 Gagan Jatav S/o Somnath Jatav Aged About 19 Years R/o Ward Number 05 Tendukheda Narsinghpur Madhya Pradesh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Abhanpur District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Pratibha Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State. : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.08.2025 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. 75/2025 registered at Police Station - Abhanpur District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 309(4) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. As per prosecution story the allegation on the present Applicant is that complainant on 20.02.2025 at around 8.30pm along with his friend VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.08.11 14:51:49 +0530 2 Shamsher Ansari went to purchase Liquor near choteurla and after purchasing when he was talking on phone on sideline suddenly three unknown persons came and on the brink of knife threatened complainant and took away his mobile phone money in the pocket and motorbike bearing number CG04PQ2699 total amounting to Rs 1,66,500/- while investigation motorbike was recovered from present Applicant and Accordingly offence under above mentioned Sections has been registered against unknown persons and during course of investigation and the Present Applicant has been arrested. 3. The applicant, a 19-year-old with no criminal antecedents, asserts that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. She contends that the learned Court below failed to consider the factual matrix, the doubtful recovery of the motorbike, and the 10-day delay in lodging the FIR. She states that the offence, if any, was committed in an intoxicated state without awareness of the consequences, and that he has been in custody since 19.03.2025. Being the sole breadwinner, his continued detention is causing severe financial hardship to his family and adversely affecting his education and livelihood. The applicant is a permanent resident, poses no risk of absconding, and is willing to furnish surety and comply with all conditions imposed by the Hon’ble High Court, therefore, she prays for grant of regular bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge sheet has already been filed before the competent Court in the present case. She further submits that, in this case, the bail applications of two co- accused persons have already been rejected, therefore, the present 3 applicant is not entitled to bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the fact that the case of the present applicant stands on a different footing from that of the other co-accused persons, that the present applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, and that he has been in judicial custody since 19.03.2025, and further considering that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Let the Applicant – Gagan Jatav, involved in Crime No. 75/2025 registered at Police Station - Abhanpur District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 309(4) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing 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 his 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 4 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