1 2025:CGHC:6065 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 683 of 2025 Ramsay Ram S/o Bitna Ram Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Bharra, Dippa, P.S. Aasta, District Jashpur, Presently R/o Anand Nagar, Uslapur, P.S. Sakri, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Sakri, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 03.02.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.882/2024, registered at Police Station Sakri, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2)(A) of the BNS. MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.02.03 17:57:04 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that it is alleged that the applicant presented a fake E-Registry before the Tahsildar - Sakri for mutation of the land situated at village P.H. No. 45, Khasra No. 781/9, 0.06 acre land is situated in the registered Tahsil. When the Tahsildar sought information from the Sub-Registrar OfÏce, Bilaspur regarding the said E-registry, it was found that the Sub-Registrar OfÏce Bilaspur had not registered any such document and the document number and date were all wrong. No such document was presented for registration on that date and the e-registration ID series itself was completely wrong. Therefore, the F.I.R has been made by the Tahsildar and an offence under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2)(A) of B.N.S. has been registered as Crime No. 882/2024 by P.S. Sakri, Bilaspur (C.G.) 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime which never committed by him. The applicant has not prepared the documents in fact the story of the prosecution made it clear that the other co- accused Kuldeep and Jitendra were the kingpin of the entire case and took advantage of the innocence, illiteracy & neighborhood of the applicant. There was no seizure of any document from the applicant. Further the main accused, namely, Jitendra Singh Rathore have already granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 8983/2024 vide order dated 02.01.2024 and other co-accused, namely, Ritesh Jajodiya has also granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 59/2025 vide order dated 08.01.2025 and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused persons. 3 So far as criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, though the applicant has 04 criminal antecedents registered against him, but he has already been granted bail in all the four cases bearing Crime No. 881/2024, 878/2024, 879/2024 and 880/2024. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.12.2024 and though the charge-sheet has been filed, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application of the applicant and also the submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused, namely, Jitendra Singh Rathore have already granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 8983/2024 vide order dated 02.01.2024 and other co-accused, namely, Ritesh Jajodiya has also granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 59/2025 vide order dated 08.01.2025 and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused persons. 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, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that co-accused, namely, Jitendra Singh Rathore have already granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 8983/2024 vide order dated 02.01.2024 and other co-accused, namely, Ritesh Jajodiya has also granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 59/2025 vide order dated 08.01.2025 and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused persons and further so far as 4 criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, he has already been granted bail in all the previous cases, the applicant is in jail since 10.12.2024, charge-sheet has already been filed and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, as such, the Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 7. Let applicant, Ramsay Ram, involved in Crime No.882/2024, registered at Police Station Sakri, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2)(A) of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy 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 them 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 Bharatiya Nyaya 5 Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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 Manpreet