1 2025:CGHC:49437 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7741 of 2025 1. Shera Baghel S/o Babulal Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Bandha Police Station Tehsil Takhatpur District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh 2. Rahul Barmathe S/o Ramsingh Barmathe Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Bandha Police Station Tehsil Takhatpur District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - P S Lormi District Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 26.09.2025 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 has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 443/2025 registered at Police Station – Lormi, District Mungeli (C.G.) offence under Sections 305(2), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a report was lodged by the complainant, namely Dilharan Sahu, stating that he had been working as a Rajmistri for the past six months in front of the New Police Station, Ward No. 09, under the construction work at Atal Premises, where a ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.09.26 16:27:25 +0530 2 submersible pump had been installed by contractor Kaushal Kulmitra. On 23.07.2025 at about 11:30 a.m., when the complainant went to start the submersible pump, he noticed that some unknown person had stolen the submersible pump cable wire measuring 120 feet, service wire measuring 100 feet, and the starter panel. On the basis of this report, the police registered the aforesaid offence against unknown persons and commenced investigation. During the course of investigation, the police arrested the co-accused and recorded his memorandum statement, on the basis of which the present applicants were arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the present applicants have been made an accused solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of another co-accused person. He also submits that the present applicants have only one criminal antecedent under the IPC, for which they have already been granted regular bail. He also submits that the present applicants have been in jail since 26.07.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She submits that the present applicants have 01 more criminal antecedents of the similar nature which shows that the applicants are habitual offender, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of regular 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, 3 particularly that the name of the applicants have come to light solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused, and that the applicants have only one criminal antecedent under the IPC, in which they have already been granted regular bail. Also considering the fact that in the present bail application the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the present applicants have been in jail since 26.07.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicants – Shera Baghel and Rahul Barmathe, involved in Crime No. 443/2025 registered at Police Station – Lormi, District Mungeli (C.G.) offence under Sections 305(2), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on her 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, proclamation 4 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek