1 2025:CGHC:43675 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5747 of 2025 Bhupendra Sahu S/o Shri Shatrughan Lal Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o Bhatapara P.S. Mujgahan District - Raipur (C.G.) ...Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Mujgahan District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28.08.2025 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. 89/2025 registered at Police Station – Mujgahan District - Raipur (C.G.) offence under Sections 331(4), 305 & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Vikas Gondwani has an iron and cement shop in the name of Sai Steel in VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.08.29 12:00:48 +0530 2 Kamal Vihar, Sector 10. On 25.04.2025 in the evening, he locked the big iron gate of his shop and boundary wall and went home. On 26.04.2025 in the morning, when he came to his shop, he saw that the lock of the gate of the boundary wall was broken and the gate was open. He went inside the enclosure and checked and found that 07 bundles of 16 mm iron rods, 08 bundles of 12 mm iron rods, 4 bundles of 10 mm iron rods, 6 bundles of 8 mm iron rods and 2 bundles of sashing wire worth about Rs. 85,000/- were kept in his enclosure. It was stolen by some unknown person and the CCTV camera installed in the enclosure was covered with cloth and other cameras were broken. 3. That the applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in this case, and no specific act has been attributed to him. The FIR was lodged against unknown persons, and though CCTV cameras were installed at the place of incident, no identification of the applicant has been made, as the real culprits had covered their faces with masks. No stolen articles have been seized from the possession of the applicant, and the prosecution has failed to collect any credible or legal evidence against him, as the case rests merely on memorandum and seizure, which is weak and inadmissible evidence. The applicant has been in custody since 14.06.2025, he is a permanent resident with no likelihood of absconding or tampering with witnesses, and he is ready to furnish adequate surety and abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail 3 application. 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, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and also considering that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant has been in jail since 14.06.2025, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Bhupendra Sahu, involved in Crime No. 89/2025 registered at Police Station – Mujgahan District - Raipur (C.G.) offence under Sections 331(4), 305 & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, 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 applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance 4 with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them 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