1 2025:CGHC:57495 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9577 of 2025 Rohit Shukla S/o Rajesh Shukla Aged About 34 Years R/o Puchha Para Katghora, District Korba Chhattisgarh .. Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mandir Hasaud, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 26.11.2025 1. This is the First bail application 5led under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 771/2024 registered at Police Station : Mandir Hasaud, District Raipur (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under Section 316(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story in brief, on 07.12.2024, the complainant, namely Praveen Namdeo, who is a businessman running Laxmi Nand Logistics Pvt. Ltd., lodged a written complaint against the driver and owner of Vehicle Nos. CG-04-MQ-6195 and CG-13-LA-4302. It was ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.11.27 10:19:57 +0530 2 alleged that they had transported inferior quality sponge iron through Trimurti Road Carrier, Raipur to Laxmi Nand Logistics Pvt. Ltd., Chhatarpur (M.H.). After checking the quality of the sponge iron, it was found to be of poor quality, therefore, an FIR was lodged against the owner and driver of the said vehicles. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the date of the alleged incident is 03.09.2024, yet the FIR was lodged after a delay of three months on 07.12.2024, and no explanation has been provided for such inordinate delay. He also submits that the applicant is only a driver and has no knowledge regarding the quality of the sponge iron being transported. His duty is limited to delivering the loaded material to the designated destination. He further submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 15.09.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some 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 charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and also endorse the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of o;ence and further the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, moreover, the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant 3 has been in jail since 15.09.2025, trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Rohit Shukla, involved in Crime No. 771/2024 registered at Police Station : Mandir Hasaud, District Raipur (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under Section 316(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall 5le an undertaking to the e;ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 5xed 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 5xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without suBcient 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 5xed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates 5xed 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 suBcient 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. OBce is directed to send a certi5ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek