1 2025:CGHC:48612 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7619 of 2025 Vickey Verma S/o Rajesh Verma Aged About 33 Years R/o Road No.9, Near Pump House, Zone-3 New Khursipar Bhilai, P.S- Khursipar, Tahsil- Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer- Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Siddharth Rathod, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulabani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.09.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this Second Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 264/2024, registered at Police Station : Mahasamund District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 457, 380, 411 of Indian Penal Code. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant has been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 6826/2024, vide order dated 03.10.2024, on KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 the ground of criminal antecedents. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant who is rendering his duties at C.S.E.B, Ambikapur and his wife and children went to Ambikapur since 03-05-24 and has engaged his driver for gardening purpose and has left key of gate with him. On 21-05-2024 the driver telephonically informed him that the lock of house is broken and thus the complainant came to Mahasamund immediately and found that the lock was broken, household articles were shattered, one 3 gram gold Ring, 4 silver Bangles, one pair silver Payal, one silver coin total worth rupees 30,000/- were stolen and thus the instant FIR was lodged. Thereafter the crime against the accused and co-accused were registered and investigation was conducted and applicant was arrested on 04-07-2024. Thereafter charge-sheet was filed against applicant along with 3 accused and since then he is languishing in jail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on the ground of his criminal antecedents and the present second bail application is being filed on a new ground. He submits that initially the applicant was arrested by the police in Case Crime No. 215/2024 registered at District Dhamtari, wherein certain recoveries were made from him. On the basis of the said case, the present case as well as Case Crime No. 252/2024 at Mahasamund came to be registered against the applicant for almost similar offences. It is pointed out that the applicant has 3 already been acquitted in Case Crime No. 215/2024 which was registered at Dhamtari and in Case Crime No. 252/2024, he has been granted bail in MCRC No. 7468/2025 vide order dated 17.09.2025. It is further submitted that the present case is also based upon the recoveries made in Case Crime No. 215/2024. He further submits that out of 12 prosecution witnesses, 6 witnesses have already been examined in trial and the applicant is in jail since 04.07.2024, it is likely to remain incarcerated for a considerable period as the trial will take time for its conclusion. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that considering the gravity of the offence and the manner in which it has been committed and one case is still pending, the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant and the fact that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on the ground of his criminal antecedents and the present second bail application is being filed on a new ground that initially the applicant was arrested by the police in Case Crime No. 215/2024 registered at District Dhamtari, wherein certain recoveries were made from him and on the basis of the said case, the present case as well as Case Crime No. 252/2024 at Mahasamund came to be registered against the applicant for 4 almost similar offences however, considering the fact that the applicant has already been acquitted in Case Crime No. 215/2024 which was registered at Dhamtari and in Case Crime No. 252/2024, he has been granted bail in MCRC No. 7468/2025 vide order dated 17.09.2025 and further the present case is also based upon the recoveries made in Case Crime No. 215/2024 and moreover that out of 12 prosecution witnesses, 6 witnesses have already been examined in trial and the applicant is in jail since 04.07.2024 and conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, this Court is inclined to allow the present application. 8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. 9. Let applicant, Vickey Verma, involved in Crime No. 264/2024, registered at Police Station : Mahasamund District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 457, 380, 411 of Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on 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. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during 5 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. 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 Kunal