1 2025:CGHC:4060 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8539 of 2024 Arjun Rajwade S/o Deran Ram Rajwade, Aged About 30 Years Caste- Rajvar, Resident Of Village- Shyamnagar, Police Station Bhatgaon, District-Surajpur (C.G.) --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Out Post Karanji, Police Station- Bishrampur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant(s) MCRC No. 8746 of 2024 Laxamn Kumar Chawdhry S/o Late Ramu Chawdhry Aged About 24 Years R/o Shyamnagar, P.S. And Tahsil- Bhatgaon, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Outpost- Karangi, P.S.- Vishrampur, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) in MCRC No.8539 of 2024 : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate For Applicant(s) in MCRC No.8746 of 2024 : Mr. Dhaneshwar Yadav, Advocate For Non – Applicant(s) /State: Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22/01/2025 1. Since the above-mentioned two bail applications arise out of same crime number, they are clubbed and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 163/2024 registered at Police Station Outpost- Karangi, P.S.- Vishrampur, District : Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 305, 331(4), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the present applicants alongwith other co-accused persons have been charged with breaking into the shop of Shivmanglal Rajwade around 12:00 am, by making a hole in the wall and stealing approximately Rs. 40,000/- from the cash box and 3 bags of rice worth around Rs. 30,000/-, totaling Rs. 70,000. thereafter, the offence has been registered against the applicants. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated in offence in question. They further submits that only on the basis of memorandum statement of the co-accused persons present applicants have been made an accused, further no seizure has 3 been made from the possession of present applicants, so far as the criminal antecedent of the applicants is concerned, applicant, namely, Arjun Rajwade has four criminal antecedents, out of which, one is Istagasha, which has already been disposed of and rest of the three cases are under the IPC, out of which, in two cases, the applicant has been granted bail and only one case is pending against him and applicant, namely, Laxamn Kumar Chawdhry has three criminal antecedents, out of which, in two cases, he has been granted bail and only one case is pending, further the applicants are in jail since applicant, namely, Arjun Rajwade – 28.08.2024 and applicant, namely, Laxamn Kumar Chawdhry – 05.11.2024, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, they prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the applicants alongwith other co-accused persons have committed theft in the shop of complainant at around 12:00 am and have stolen approximately Rs. 40,000/- from the cash box and 3 bags of rice worth around Rs. 30,000/-, totaling Rs. 70,000, further the applicant, namely, Arjun Rajwade has four criminal antecedents and applicant, namely, Laxamn Kumar Chawdhry has three criminal antecedents, therefore, the applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused 4 the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant, namely, Arjun Rajwade since 28.08.2024 and applicant, namely, Laxamn Kumar Chawdhry since 05.11.2024, the fact that though the allegation against the they alongwith other co-accused persons, have committed theft in the shop of complainant and have stolen articles and cash total amounting to Rs.70,000/-, but applicant, namely, Arjun Rajwade has four criminal antecedents, out of which, one case has been disposed of, in two cases, he has been granted bail, besides these three cases, he has only one case pending against him, so far as applicant, namely, Laxamn Kumar Chawdhry is concerned, he has three criminal antecedents, out of which, in two cases, he has been granted bail by the trial Court and besides these two cases, he has only one case pending against him, hence both the applicants have only one case pending against them and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicants-Arjun Rajwade and Laxamn Kumar Chawdhry, involved in Crime No. 163/2024 registered at Police Station Outpost- Karangi, P.S.- Vishrampur, District : Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 305, 331(4), 3(5) of BNS, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the 5 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 sufÏcient 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 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 sufÏcient 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. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil