1 2025:CGHC:6075 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 928 of 2025 • Lokesh Mirjha S/o Prakash Mirjha Aged About 24 Years R/o - Central Jail, Ayog Bhavani Nagar, Thana- Saraswati Nagar, Raipur, Dist.- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant. versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through- District Magistrate, Kabirdham, Dist.- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. ... State/Respondent. For Applicant : Ms. Surya Kawalkar Dangi, Advocate. For State : Shri UKS Chandel, Deputy AG. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03/02/2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 542/2024 registered at Police Station : Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 305(b), 306, 61(2), 238, 112 (2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. Prosecution case in brief is that Complainant Dinesh Kumar who AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2025.02.04 15:03:07 +0530 2 runs an electric business, alleged that on August 24, 2024, he along with his son namely Sajal Jain and driver Saurabh Rahulkar, collected Rs. 2,22,000 from various customers and kept the same in a bag in his vehicle. Thereafter, he went for lunch with his son at Marwadi Bhojnalaya, instructing the driver to park the vehicle nearby. After lunch, they went to Vinayak Copper House to collect Rs. 10,000, but found that the bag containing the money had been stolen from the vehicle. The police registered offense under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and began investigating. During investigation, Rs.50,000/- was seized from the present applicant. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per No.4193/Warrant/2024 dated 20.12.2024 received through Legal Aid, there are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. She further submits that co-accused namely Saurabh Rahulkar has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 26.11.2024 passed in MCRC No.6696/2024 and case present applicant is similar to that of his. She further submits that applicant is in jail since 26.08.2024 and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and would submit that from the present applicant, Rs.50,000/- cash was seized and as per the memorandum 3 statement of present applicant, in 2020, being a juvenile, he got involved in knife stabbing and in 2022, he was involved in case of kidnapping. However, learned State counsel would not dispute the fact that case of present applicant is similar to that of co- accused Saurabh Rahulkar. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and particularly the fact that co-accused namely Saurabh Rahulkar has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 26.11.2024 passed in MCRC No.6696 of 2024, this Court is of the opinion that present applicant is also entitled to be granted regular bail on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Applicant- Lokesh Mirjha, involved in Crime No. 542/2024 registered at Police Station : Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 305(b), 306, 61(2), 238, 112 (2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 4 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 sufÏcient 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 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 sufÏcient 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. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Avinash