1 2025:CGHC:2790 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 405 of 2025 Pradip Chouhan S/o Subak Chouhan Aged About 25 Years R/o Suraj Nagar, Labhandi, Police Station - Telibandha, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station - Telibandha, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate. For Non-Applicant(s) : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer, Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/01/2025 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. 790/2024 registered at Police Station Telibandha, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(4), 317(2)/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 04.12.2024, the complainant, Shishupal Singh, filed a report against a person named Mukku at the Telibandha Police Station alleging that on 02.12.2024, the complainant was riding his scooter in New Rajendra Nagar when Mukku called him and asked him to meet near the Telibandha signal. When the complainant arrived, Mukku told him that the area was crowded and suggested they go to a secluded spot in Brahmadev Nagar, Labhandi. There, Mukku allegedly threatened and intimidated the complainant, stealing two gold rings worth around 40,000 rupees and Rs.1,200/- in cash from him. After the incident, Mukku's friend, Pradeep Chauhan, arrived and they escaped on the complainant's scooter, thereafter, the offence has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that only on the basis of memorandum statement of co-accused, the present applicant has been made an accused, further no recovery has been made from the present applicant, the only allegation against the applicant that he accompanied the main accused Mukku. The applicant is in jail since 05.12.2023, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge- sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further 3 submits that co-accused Mukku has stolen two gold rings worth around 40,000 rupees and Rs.1,200/- in cash from the complainant, thereafter present applicant arrived there and they both fled the scene, further nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, but applicant has one criminal antecedent of the year 2014, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 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 offence, period of detention of the applicant since 05.12.2024, the fact that the allegation against the applicant that he accompanied the main accused, namely, Mukku, who has stolen the said ornaments & cash from the complainant, but learned State counsel could not dispute the fact that no recovery has been made from the present applicant, so far as the criminal antecedent of the applicant is concerned, he has only one criminal antecedent of the year 2014, which is old and stale and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant-Pradip Chouhan, involved in Crime No. 790/2024 registered at Police Station Telibandha, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(4), 317(2)/3(5) of BNS, 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:- 4 (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 sufÏcient 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. (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 sufÏcient 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. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil