1 2025:CGHC:3131 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8903 of 2024 Lalita Giri W/o Md. Shadik, Aged About 23 Years R/o Village-Alkhdiha, P.S. And Tehsil-Rajpur, District-Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O., Police Station-Pathalgaon, District-Jashpur (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant Along with MCRC No. 8958 of 2024 Lalita Giri W/o Md. Shadik Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Alkhdiha, R/ o Village Alkhdiha, P.S. And Tehsil - Rajpur, Distt. Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station - Pathalgaon, Dist. Jashpur (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant Along with MCRC No. 8967 of 2024 Lalita Giri W/o Md. Shadik Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Alkhdiha P.S. And Tehsil Rajpur, Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O. Police Station- Pathalgaon, Dist- Jashpur Chhattisgarh. --- Non-Applicant RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.01.20 10:48:49 +0530 2 Along with MCRC No. 255 of 2025 Lalita Giri W/o Md. Shadik Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Alkhdiha, P.S. And Tehsil- Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ---Applicant Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O., Police Station- Pathalgaon, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Pathak, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17.01.2025 1. Since all the the bail applications are arising out of similar incidents registered at same Police Stations and also the applicant is same in all the bail applications but their crime numbers are different, they are being heard and decided by this common order. 2. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as she has been arrested in connection with Crime Nos. 874/2024, 828/2024, 875/2024 and 829/2024 registered respectively at Police Station : Pathalgaon, District Jashpur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 304(2), 112(2), 3(6) and 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 12.10.2024, the complainant, Smt. Pooja Gupta, visited the Pathalgaon Police Station and orally reported that at around 1:40 PM, during the 3 Durga Visarjan procession, some unknown persons snatched her wedding necklace valued at Rs. 44,428/-. During the investigation, co-accused persons were arrested, and their memorandum statement was recorded by the police, in which she named the present applicant. Based on her statement, the present applicant has been implicated in the case. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the alleged article has not been recovered from exclusive possession of the applicant because the seizure of the article from the main accused person. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 13.10.2024, and the applicant has no criminal antecedents except these cases, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. She further submits that at around 1:40 PM, during the Durga Visarjan procession, some unknown persons snatched her wedding necklace valued at Rs. 44,428/-. During the investigation, co- accused persons were arrested, and their memorandum statement was recorded by the police, in which she named the present applicant. Therefore, the present applicant is not entitled to be granted regular bail in this case. 4 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 offence, period of detention of the applicant since 13.10.2024, the fact that the alleged article has not been recovered from exclusive possession of the applicant because the seizure of the article from the main accused person, further the case of present applicant is distinguishable to that of the co- accused person, who snatched the wedding necklace valued at Rs. 44,428/-, the applicant has no criminal antecedent except these cases and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicant – Lalita Giri, involved in Crime Nos. 874/2024, 828/2024, 875/2024 and 829/2024 registered respectively at Police Station : Pathalgaon, District Jashpur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 304(2), 112(2), 3(6) and 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 she 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 5 court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, 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 her in accordance with law. 9. OfÏce 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 Rahul Dewangan