1 2025:CGHC:984 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 20 of 2025 Sahil Ahmad S/o Vasim Ahmad Aged About 26 Years Ward No. 02, New Market Bacheli, P.S. Bacheli, District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. … Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Bacheli, District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Mirza Hafeez Baig, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.01.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 239/2024, registered at Police Station : Bacheli, District Dantewada, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137, 140(1) and 3(4) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant filed a missing person report at the concerned police station against an unknown person. The report alleges that on 18.09.2024, at RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.01.08 11:14:45 +0530 2 approximately 11:00 a.m., the accused abducted minor children from the house of Smt. Chhoti Kunjam without informing the relatives. Based on this information, the police registered an offence under Sections 137, 140(1), and 3(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 239/2024 against an unknown person. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the applicant is driver of the auto rickshaw and he was hired by the co-accused person, namely, Aakansha Sharma had abducted the 18 days child of the complainant and during the trial he was arrested along with the co-accused and the child who was recovered on the same day and child in question has already been handed over. He further submits that the present applicant is in jail since 19.09.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that on 18.09.2024, at approximately 11:00 a.m., the present applicant abducted 18 days child from the house of Smt. Chhoti Kunjam without informing the relatives, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the applicant is driver of the auto rickshaw and he was hired by 3 the co-accused person, namely, Aakansha Sharma had abducted the 18 days child of the complainant and during the trial he was arrested along with the co-accused and the child who was recovered on the same day and child in question has already been handed over and also considering the fact that in the present bail application the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 13.11.2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant – Sahil Ahmad, involved in Crime No. 239/2024, registered at Police Station : Bacheli, District Dantewada, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137, 140(1) and 3(4) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 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 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. 4 (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 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