1 2025:CGHC:52866 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7432 of 2025 1 - Manjeet Jangde S/o Ramlal Jangde Aged About 19 Years R/o Dighora, (Wrongly Written As Dighor In Order -Sheet), P.S. -Hirri, Dist-Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Vikas Yadav S/o Bisahu Yadav Aged About 19 Years R/o Village-Amne, P.S. Kota, Dist- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sho Of Police Station -Koni, Dist- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Pallav Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.10.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 200/2025 registered at Police Station - Koni District - Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 304, 105, 62 & 3(5) of the BNSS. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.10.30 12:07:29 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution story, the complainant, Vijay Kumar Sahu, lodged a report stating that while he was returning to Madanpur along with his wife, an unknown person, riding a motorcycle, came perpendicularly in front of their vehicle and attempted to snatch the purse of his wife. In an attempt to resist the snatching, the complainant’s wife fell from the scooty and sustained severe injuries, to which she later succumbed. During investigation, the police, on the basis of a memorandum recorded in connection with another case registered at Police Station Sargaon, District Mungeli, arrested the present applicants and implicated them in the present offence. However, no substantial incriminating material was seized from the applicants. Thereafter, the FIR was lodged, and the applicants were arrested and sent to judicial custody, leading to the filing of the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the applicant has not been found in possession of the said motorcycle or purse as alleged by the complainant. All the sections imposed against the applicant are bailable in nature, and It is further submitted that an explanation was sought from the Investigating Officer with regard to the query raised by this Hon’ble Court about not conducting the Test Identification Parade (TIP). The Investigating Officer submitted that the complainant was called several times for the purpose of TIP, but he stated that he had not seen the accused persons and, therefore, was unable to identify the culprits. The explanation given by the Investigating Officer was found unsatisfactory, and he was accordingly awarded censure 3 as punishment. Relevant documents in this regard are collectively filed as Annexure A-1. It is further submitted that the entire prosecution case is based merely on the memorandum statement allegedly obtained from the applicants. Since the TIP was not conducted, the entire story of snatching and death appears to be fabricated and concocted. Even if the prosecution story is accepted as it is, the alleged act would not fall under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, but under Section 106, which is bailable in nature. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses. The applicant is ready to furnish adequate surety and undertakes to abide by all the conditions which may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting bail, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicants were found involved in the offence of snatching, which led to the death of the complainant’s wife. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and considering the gravity of the offence and the material collected during investigation, the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, it 4 appears that the present applicants have been implicated on the basis of a memorandum recorded in connection with another case registered at Police Station Sargaon, District Mungeli, while the complainant, Vijay Kumar Sahu, was returning to Madanpur along with his wife, an unknown person attempted to snatch her purse, due to which she fell from the scooty and sustained severe injuries, resulting in her death. However, no direct evidence has been produced to establish the involvement of the present applicants in the alleged offence, and no substantial incriminating material has been seized from them during the investigation. The applicants have remained in custody since 24.05.2025, and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. As the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicants – Manjeet Jangde & Vikas Yadav , involved in Crime No. 200/2025 registered at Police Station - Koni District - Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 304, 105, 62 & 3(5) of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial 5 court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants 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 applicants 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 them 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/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav