1 2025:CGHC:4026 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 608 of 2025 Bhuneshwar Paikra S/o Shri Omkumar Paikra Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Thakurdiya, Thana- Kasdol, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Kasdol, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22.01.2025 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. 297/2024, registered at Police Station : Kasdol, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(3), 305(a) and 317(2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Ramkrishna, lodged a report at Police Station Kasdol on 16.08.2024, alleging that on the intervening night of 15.08.2024, an RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.01.23 16:48:56 +0530 2 unknown person entered his house and committed theft of ornaments and cash amounting to Rs. 6,000/-, with the total value of stolen property being Rs. 16,000/-. Based on the report, the police registered an offence, arrested the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He also submits that the name of the applicant is not mentioned in the FIR and after about 03 months of the incident applicant was arrested in the aforesaid crime through production warrant. He further submits that there is no material evidence available in the record to establish the fact that the applicant has entered into house of the complainant for committed the offence of theft. He further submits that the present applicant has 01 criminal antecedent which is pending and the present applicant is in jail since 23.11.2024 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 the present applicant has entered his house and committed theft of ornaments and cash amounting to Rs. 6,000/-, with the total value of stolen property being Rs. 16,000/-. She further submits that the present applicant has 01 criminal antecedent under the similar nature of the year 2024 which is pending , therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case 3 diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that though the present applicant has entered his house and committed theft of ornaments and cash amounting to Rs. 6,000/-, with the total value of stolen property being Rs. 16,000/- and he has 01 criminal antecedent which is pending, but in the present bail application the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 23.11.2024 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. Let the Applicant – Bhuneshwar Paikra, involved in Crime No. 297/2024, registered at Police Station : Kasdol, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(3), 305(a) and 317(2) of Bhartiya 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 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 4 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 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