1 2025:CGHC:50934 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5922 of 2025 Sangat Singh Kalyani S/o Mr. Ajmer Singh Kalyani Aged About 47 Years R/o Survey No. 110, Sai Baba Mandir, Samor Sonat Basti, Ramtekari, Pune, Distt.- Pune Maharashtra ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Rajendra Nagar, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Raza Ali, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.10.2025 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. 379/2024 registered at Police Station – Rajendra Nagar, Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) under Sections 331(1) & 305 (A), of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case in brief is that, theft has been committed in the house at VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.10.14 11:08:17 +0530 VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.10.14 11:18:21 +0530 2 Kushabhau Thakre residential premises and FIR against the two person has been registered bearing crime number 379/2024 and thereafter two accused has been arrested in 2024 itself and based on their memorandum statement the applicant got implicated in February 2025. 3. The applicant submits that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He has not committed any offence and has not played any role in the alleged crimes. It is further submitted that the stolen property has been recovered from the other two accused persons and not from the present applicant. The applicant has been implicated only after a lapse of three months, and there is an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR. The two co-accused persons have committed the offences, and the stolen property has been recovered from them; however, no such stolen property has been recovered from the present applicant. Furthermore, three offences have been registered against the applicant solely on the basis of the memorandum statements of the two main accused persons, out of which, in one case, the applicant has already been released on bail by the remand court itself. The applicant’s previous criminal record has already been mentioned in the bail application. He is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, and there is no possibility of his absconding. He has been in jail since 25.02.2025, and as the conclusion of the trial may take some time, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there are 17 criminal antecedents 3 registered against the present applicant and the charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be granted regular bail in the present case. 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, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that no recovery has been made from the possession of the applicant and further considering that the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant has been in jail since 25.02.2025, and that the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Sangat Singh Kalyani, involved in Crime No. 379/2024 registered at Police Station – Rajendra Nagar, Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) under Sections 331(1) & 305 (A), of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two local 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 sufficient 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 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/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav