1 / 3 2025:CGHC:846 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10 of 202 5 • Imran Khan S/o Sakauddin Khan Aged About 23 Years R/o Jawahar Nagar, House No. 7106, Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Bhilai Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattisgagh ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Newai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mrs. Mukta Tripathi, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judg e ORDER ON BOARD 07/01/2025 1. First application filed by applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 08.01.2024. Applicant has filed this second bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 15/2023 registered at Police Station – Newai, Dis.trict Durg (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 454, 294, 323, 506, 395, 397, 324 of IPC and Section 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that complainant Nargis Khan lodged a report in the concerned police station on 10.01.2023 stating that in the morning at about 06:00 am when she woke up and took her children to washroom she saw one unknown person hiding in the house, he came to her and threatened that, he was sent to jail on the statement given by her husband. He asked for PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 3 the cash and valuable articles, assaulted her by means of hand, fist and sharped edged weapon. Under threat the accused person forced the complainant to open the almirah and thereafter the said person has taken out Rs. 8000/- cash as also silver anklet kept in the almirah and fled away. Based on the report, initially crime was registered against unknown person. During course of investigation, applicant was interrogated and he was arrested on 31.01.2023. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. After withdrawal of first bail application, material witnesses have been examined, they have not supported the case of prosecution. He contended that except the statement of complainant and other witnesses ie., seizure witnesses, witness(es) to test identification parade, have not supported the case of prosecution. Applicant is in jail since 31.01.2023 and thereby completed almost two years of pre-trial detention, trial may take some time, hence, applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and further submits that there are specific allegation against applicant, he has been identified in the test identification parade by the complainant. During course of investigation, robbed articles, silver anklet and Rs. 1500/- have been seized from possession of applicant. He is a habitual offender, there are as many as seven other criminal cases are registered against him. She also submits that applicant was found present in the house, committing offence which is recorded in the CCTV footage of which panchnama is also prepared. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 6. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, further considering that complainant has already been examined 3 / 3 before the trial court, period of pre-trial detention, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) 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. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) 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. (d) 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 sufficient 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. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE