1 2025:CGHC:45984 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7157 of 2025 Shekh Chunnu S/o Noor Aalam Aged About 19 Years R/o Moti Jharana, Police Station Taljhadi, District : Sahibganj, Jharkhand ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Janjgir, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Ishwar Jaiswal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09.09.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.586/2023, registered at Police Station- Janjgir, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 379, 420/34, 201 of IPC. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant has lodged a report before the concerned Police Station, alleging therein that on the date of incident, the unknown persons have committed theft of KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 mobile and also withdrawn some amount from complainant's bank account. Based upon such complaint made by the complainant, the police has registered the case under Section 379, 420/34, 201 of I.P.C. against the unknown persons and after the investigation, the police has arrested the present applicant on the memorandum statement. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the present applicant has neither committed theft of mobile nor withdrawn any subject amount of the complainant and the prosecution has not collected the sufficient material from the possession of the applicant regarding theft of the said article. The police has not seized any said article from the possession of the applicant with regard to subject of ornament and cash subject amount and only on the basis of memorandum of statement, the applicant has arrested by police. He further submits that there are total 35 prosecution witnesses, out of which, as many as 07 witnesses have been examined and rest witnesses will take long time to conclude the trial and hence this court may kindly be pleased to consider it and grant bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court however, the fact that Rs. 15,12,921/- has been withdrawn from the complainant’s mobile by the accused persons. He further submits that the bail application of co-accused has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 3 3865/2025, vide order dated 15.05.2025, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties as also the nature of crime and the amount of money which was withdrawn by the applicant along with co-accused from complainant’s mobile and also considering the fact that the bail application of the co-accused has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 3865/2025, vide order dated 15.08.2025 and out of 34 prosecution witnesses, 7 witnesses have been recorded thus, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant namely Shekh Chunnu involved in Crime No.586/2023, registered at Police Station- Janjgir, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 379, 420/34, 201 of IPC., is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. 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 0. Kunal