1 2025:CGHC:38417 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6076 of 2025 1 - Bittu Alias Mohammad Hussaian S/o Mohammad Ameen Aged About 21 Years R/o Taj Nagar, Jhilmila, Saraipali Thana- Saraipali, Distt.- Mahasamund (C.G.) 2 - Karan Behra S/o Shyam Behra Aged About 22 Years R/o Bazarpara Ward Number 11 Saraipali Thana- Saraipali Distt.- Mahasamund (C.G) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Saraipali Distt.- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 04/08/2025 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 245/2024 registered at Police Station- Saraipali District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence under Section 309(6) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, Saukilal Das, lodged a report on 12.09.2024 at Police Station Saraipali stating that on the same day, i.e., 12.09.2024, while he was travelling from Raipur to Bargadh in bus bearing registration number OD-17-U- 0576, and upon reaching near Saraipali, Jhilmila Post, four persons, riding two different motorcycles, threatened him at gunpoint and forced him to alight from the bus. Upon his stepping out of the bus, the accused persons fired at him with a country- made pistol (desi katta), causing injuries to his head. At that juncture, the accused persons looted ₹12,000 (Rupees Twelve Thousand) in cash and a Samsung mobile phone bearing SIM number 9861106293. On the complainant raising an alarm, nearby people gathered at the spot. The incident was thereafter reported to the complainant’s higher company officials, following which the present report was lodged against the accused persons. Investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed. Hence this bail application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that no role has been played by the applicants, they were not present at the place of the incident. He further submits that the applicants have been arrested only on the basis of doubt, there is no direct or indirect evidence collected by the police against the applicants. He further submits that no test identification pared has been conducted by the police and in absence thereof the actual culprits cannot be ascertained 3 particularly when the FIR has been lodged against the unknown persons. He further submits that in the present case, co-accused person, namely, Mohsin @ Bablu has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 30.07.2025 passed in MCRC No. 3445 of 2025. He also submits that the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicants are in jail since 14.09.2024 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that the charge- sheet has already been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that from the possession of the present applicants country-made pistol (desi katta), cash and a mobile phone have been recovered. She also submits that applicant No.1 has 01 criminal antecedent under the similar nature and applicant no.2 has 02 criminal antecedents, which shows that the present applicants are habitual offender, therefore, the present applicants are 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 allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that though the some recovery has been made from the possession of the applicants, but other co-accused person, namely, Mohsin @ Bablu has already been granted bail by this 4 Court vide order dated 30.07.2025 passed in MCRC No. 3445 of 2025 and the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant are in jail since 14.09.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to allow this application on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Applicants – Bittu Alias Mohammad Hussaian and Karan Behra, involved in Crime No. 245/2024 registered at Police Station- Saraipali District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence under Section 309(6) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each 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, 5 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 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan