1 2025:CGHC:46590 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5756 of 2025 Teman Lal Sahu S/o Ramkhilawan Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Chilamgotha P.S. Manchuwa District- Balod, C.G. ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Basantpur District Rajnandgaon, C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Aditya Bhardwaj, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 11.09.2025 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.97/2025 registered at Police Station – Basantpur District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2) & 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita 2023. 2. As per prosecution case, the complainant on 22.02.2025 had parked VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.09.12 12:54:03 +0530 2 his motorcycle by the roadside in front of Punjab Sweets and had gone inside to work. When he came out arount 10:00 PM. He noticed that the motorcycle was missing from the place where it had been parked. He then lodged a report with the police. That during the course of investigation, information was received indicating that the stolen motorcycle was found in possession of the accused Teman Lal Sahu and Pradeep Kumar. Accordingly, the stolen motorcycle was seized and the accused were taken into custody. Pursuant to this information the stolen motorcycle was included in Crime No.2/2025 registered under Section 303(2) and 3(5) of the BNS at Police Station Kotgul District Gadchiroli (M.H.) 3. The applicant submits that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has consistently held in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra (2011) 1 SCC 694, State of Kerala v. Raneef (2011) 1 SCC 784, and Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. (2018) 3 SCC 22 that bail is the rule, jail is the exception, and that prolonged incarceration without conclusion of trial violates the presumption of innocence and the fundamental right to personal liberty. The applicant has been in jail since 03.06.2025, the charge sheet has been filed, and further detention will serve no purpose but only cause undue hardship and ruin his life. He is a peace-loving citizen, not a threat to society, not influential enough to tamper with witnesses or the trial, and being a permanent resident, there is no chance of absconding. He is ready to furnish adequate security and comply with any conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court, and therefore prays for grant of bail, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application. 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. Moreover, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and no incriminating articles have been seized from the possession of the present applicant and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 03.06.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Teman Lal Sahu, involved in Crime No.97/2025 registered at Police Station – Basantpur District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2) & 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita 2023., be released on bail on his 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 initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, 4 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