1 2025:CGHC:4264 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 431 of 2025 Satish Kumar Sinha S/o Shri Lakhan Lal Sinha Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Rahud, Police Station Ranchirai, District Balod Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - Supela District Durg Chhattisgarh 490023 ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Praveen Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Laywer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23.01.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 673/2024 registered at Police Station Supela, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 379, 34 and 411 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a complaint was lodged regarding an offence under Section 379 of the IPC, 1860, at Police Chowki Smritinagar, under Durg Police Station, Supela, by Kartik RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.01.25 14:08:13 +0530 2 Bijarniya, S/o Ved Pal, aged about 25 years, a resident of near Sankara Medical College, Kaveri Hostel, Police Chowki Smritinagar, P.S. Supela, Durg. The complainant reported that his old white Scooty 3G bearing registration number C.G.04 HX 4720 was stolen by an unknown thief on 03/06/2024 between 2:30 PM and 6:00 PM from the parking area of Sankaracharya Hospital, Junwani, under the jurisdiction of Police Chowki Smritinagar, P.S. Supela. On the basis of this report, a crime was registered, and an investigation was initiated by the police. During the investigation, it was discovered that a case had been registered at Police Chowki Smritinagar under Crime No. 940/2024, Sections 303(2), 112, and 3(5) BNS, and materials related to that case had been seized. Based on the evidence collected and the records of the above case, the involvement of the accused in the offence was established. The accused were subsequently arrested. Permission was obtained from the Learned Court to transfer the stolen vehicle mentioned above (as per the seizure memo of Crime No. 940/2024) to this case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned case. He submits that the applicant has been serving as an ambulance driver at Sankaracharya Hospital, Junwani, for the past seven years, maintaining an unblemished service record. He further submits that there is no evidence against the applicant except for the seizure memo of the stolen vehicles. Furthermore, he points out that the police report fails to provide any 3 evidence from video footage linking the applicant to the theft of the motorcycle. Additionally, he states that based on the seizure of same three vehicles, Supela Police Station registered 08 other similar cases against the applicant including this case, against which the applicant has filed the bail applications and has already been granted bail by this Court in all cases. He emphasizes that apart from these cases, the applicant has no prior criminal record and the applicant is in jail since 31.08.2024, conclusion of the fiat may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the present applicant is allegedly involved in the theft of motorcycles in several cases, and three motorcycles were also seized from his possession, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of 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, and the fact that applicant has been serving as an ambulance driver at Sankaracharya Hospital, Junwani, further, based on the seizure of same three vehicles, the Supela Police Station registered 08 other similar cases against the applicant including this case, against which the applicant has filed the bail applications and has already been granted bail by this Court in all cases, the applicant has no 4 prior criminal record, moreover, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case, and the applicant is languishing in jail since 31.08.2024, and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant- Satish Kumar Sinha, involved in Crime No. 673/2024 registered at Police Station Supela, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 379, 34 and 411 of Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on their 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 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 5 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 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