1 2025:CGHC:37926 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6030 of 2025 Nikhil Chandrakar S/o Laxman Prasad Chandrakar Aged About 43 Years R/o F-15, Avanti Vihar, Sector 02, Khamhardih, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Khamhardih, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Victim appeared in person. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01.08.2025 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. 552/2024 registered at Police Station – Khamhardih, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 454, 380 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 19.12.2024, the complainant lodged a written complaint at the concerned police station stating that on 28/12/2022, the applicant along with two other persons entered the complainant’s house using a duplicate key and attempted to destroy ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.08.02 11:19:52 +0530 2 evidence related to offences under Sections 376 and 377 of the IPC. They also stole various documents, including medical records, mark sheets, and other educational certificates, along with other belongings. It is further alleged that the incident was captured on CCTV footage, in which Golu can be seen entering the premises, while Nilesh is seen standing outside the house. Thereafter, an FIR was registered at Police Station Khamhardih, District Raipur. A copy of the FIR is filed herewith as Annexure A-2. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the complainant had earlier lodged an FIR for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 377 of the IPC against the present applicant, in which the applicant has already been granted regular bail by the Competent Court. Thereafter, the present FIR has been lodged against the applicant on the allegation that certain documents related to the said criminal case, belonging to the complainant, have been stolen by the present applicant. He further submits that co-accused, namely, Nilesh Sarvaiyya, has already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 5661 of 2025 vide order dated 18.07.2025. He also submits that the present applicant has been in jail since 17.04.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. 5. On the other hand, objector in person has also opposed the prayers made by learned counsel for the applicant for grant of bail. 3 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the other co-accused person, namely, Nilesh Sarvaiyya, has already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 5661 of 2025 vide order dated 18.07.2025, moreover, the fact that in the present bail application the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the present applicant is in jail since 17.04.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicant – Nikhil Chandrakar, involved in Crime No. 552/2024 registered at Police Station – Khamhardih, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 454, 380 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two 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 him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (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 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. 9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of six months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 10. 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 Abhishek