1 2025:CGHC:43988 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6452 of 2025 1. Niranjan Banjare, S/o Shri Bisamber Banjare, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Chavela, Thana Bhanupratappur, District North Baster, Kanker (C.G.). 2. Takesh Bharti @ Arun, S/o Shri Devah Singh Bharti, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Village Chavela, Thana Bhanupratappur, District North Baster, Kanker (C.G.). --- Applicants versus • State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police Station Bhanupratappur, District North Baster, Kanker (C.G.). --- Non-applicant AND MCRC No. 6401 of 2025 1. Niranjan Banjare, S/o Shri Bisamber Banjare, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Chavela, Thana Bhanupratappur, District North Baster, Kanker (C.G.). 2. Takesh Bharti @ Arun, S/o Shri Devah Singh Bharti, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Village Chavela, Thana Bhanupratappur, District North Baster, Kanker (C.G.). --- Applicants Versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Bhanupratappur, Distt.- North Baster Kanker (C.G.) --- Non-applicant (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicants in both the : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate. 2 bail applications For State/Non-applicant : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.08.2025 1. These are the first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants, who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.65/2025 & Crime No.120/2024 registered at Police Station Bhanupratappur, District North Bastar, Kanker (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2), 317(2), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in MCRC No.6452/2025 and for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 411, 34 of IPC in MCRC No.6401/2025. 2. The prosecution story of MCRC No.6452/2025, in brief, is that complainant Om Prakash Nareti has taken the mixture machine from Roman Sonwani on 31.03.2025 for construction work of his house, which has been stolen by some unknown persons in the intervening night of 01.04.2025 – 02.04.2025. Thereafter, complainant lodged a written complaint on 09.04.2025 against the unknown persons. During investigation, police arrested the present applicants on 01.06.2025. 3. The prosecution story of MCRC No.6401/2025, in brief, is that complainant Om Prakash Nareti has parked his old trolley outside the house of his uncle (Mama), which has been stolen by some unknown persons in the intervening night of 05.06.2024 – 06.06.2024. Thereafter, complainant lodged a written complaint on 08.06.2024 against the unknown persons. After investigation, police could not find the thieves, therefore, a closure report was filed on 15.04.2025. 3 4. In MCRC No.6452/2025, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that present applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in crime in question. He further submits that FIR has been lodged belatedly on 09.04.2025, whereas the incident took place on 01.04.2025. It is further submitted that except memorandum statement, prosecution agency has not collected any cogent or reliable evidence to prove the guilt of the applicants. Applicants are the only bread earner of their family, charge sheet has already been filed and they are in jail since 01.06.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 5. In MCRC No.6401/2025, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that present applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in crime in question. He further submitted that FIR was lodged on 08.06.2024 and the closure report was filed on 15.04.2025, as the prosecution agency could not find the actual culprit. It is further submitted that nothing has been seized from the possession of the present applicants. Applicants are the only bread earner of their family, charge sheet has already been filed and they are in jail since 01.06.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that charge sheet has already been filed in both the cases and except the present cases, there are criminal antecedents of the year 2025 registered against the present applicants, therefore, these bail application are liable to be rejected. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 8. After hearing the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as the fact that applicants are the only bread earner in their family, further considering the fact that closure report has been filed in MCRC No.6401/2025 and also considering the fact that nothing has been seized from their possession. Also considering the fact that prosecution agency has not collected any cogent and reliable evidence to prove the guilt of the applicants. Charge sheet has already been filed in both the cases and the applicants are in jail since 01.06.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 9. Accordingly, the instant bail applications of the applicants are allowed. Let the Applicant No.1 – Niranjan Banjare and Applicant No.2 – Takesh Bharti @ Arun, involved in Crime No.65/2025 & Crime No.120/2024 registered at Police Station Bhanupratappur, District North Bastar, Kanker (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2), 317(2), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in MCRC No.6452/2025 and for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 411, 34 of IPC in MCRC No.6401/2025, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in both the cases 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 5 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 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. 10. 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 DEEPTI JHA NIRALA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA NIRALA