1 2025:CGHC:53604 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6731 of 2025 1 - Yogesh Nai S/o Nandkishor Nai @ Nandu Aged About 20 Years R/o Momasar Bans, P.S. Dungargarh, District Bikaner Rajasthan. --- Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Azad Chowk, District Raipur C.G. --- Non-Applicant MCRC No. 7286 of 2025 1 - Kalu Bhargav @ Rajesh S/o Omprakash Bhargav Aged About 25 Years R/o Near Aadsar Pani Tanki, Bhairo Chowk Ward No. 33, District Bikaner Rajasthan ---Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Azad Chowk, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Non-Applicant MCRC No. 6731/2025 For Applicant : Mr. Vaibhav Shukla, Advocate along with Mr. Vipul Ojha, Advocate and Mr. Himanshu Yadu, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer MCRC No. 7657/2025 For Applicant : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate along with Mr. B.L. Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer SB : Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice ORDER ON BOARD 03/11/2025 1. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya 2 Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 111/2025 registered at Police Station – Azad Chowk, District – Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 309(4), 61 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution's case is that, on the complainant namely, lodged report in the concerned police station alleging that he is working as marketing agent and on the date of incident, he was returning to his house from M.G. Road and when he reached near Samta Colony, behind Kedar Hospital, Raipur, at that time, three unknown persons came there, assaulted and looted an amount of Rs. 4,40,000-, his mobile phone with SIM Card bearing No. 9981769683 and Aadhar Card from the complainant. Based on the report, offence was registered by the police authorities and during the course of investigation, the applicants were arrested on 04.08.2025 and 14.05.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the respective applicants submit that the present applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case, they have not committed any offence as alleged. Mr. Vaibhav Shukla submits that the applicant in MCRC No. 6731/2025 had not assaulted the applicant and he has been implicated in the present case on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused persons. He submits that the no recovery of articles have been made from the present applicant and thus, there is no direct evidence available against him in the charge-sheet. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, he submits that as per the knowledge of deponent there is no other criminal antecedent against the applicant. Applicant is in jail since 04.08.2025. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Mr. C.R. Sahu, learned counsel for the applicant in MCRC No. 7286/2025 submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no seizure made from the possession of the applicant and in the FIR, there is no mention of the applicant. He submits that out of 07 accused 3 persons, 04 co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court in MCRC No. 4841/2025 vide order dated 30.07.2025 and in M.Cr.C. No. 6970/2025 vide order dated 02.09.2025 and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Trial Court, thus is no chance of absconding of the applicant. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, there are no criminal antecedents against him, conclusion of the trial may take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that though the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case, but there specific allegations against the applicants of committing assault and robbery upon the complainant and seizure has also been made from the co-accused persons, based upon their statements, the applicants were impleaded in the present crime. However, he do not dispute the submission of counsel for the respective applicants regarding the criminal antecedents against the respective applicants and submits that the Applicant Kalu Bhargav @ Rajesh is a habitual offender and is having 03 criminal antecedents in the State of Rajasthan and therefore, they may not be granted bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents enclosed along with the bail application. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission of counsel for the respective parties and further, the fact that charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, co-accused persons have already been granted bail in MCRC No. 4841/2025 and M.Cr.C. No. 6970/2025, period of pre-trial detention, conclusion of the trial may takes some more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 4 8. Let the Applicants – Yogesh Nai in MCRC No. 6731/2025 and Kalu Bhargav @ Rajesh in MCRC No. 7286/2025, involved in Crime No. 111/2025 registered at Police Station – Azad Chowk, District – Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 309 (4), 61 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond with two sureties 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 court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, 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 5 absence of the applicants are 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. 9. 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 Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY