1 2025:CGHC:58596 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9778 of 2025 Yuvraj Rathore S/o Gayaprasad Rathore Aged About 20 Years R/o Mahuda, Ward No. 01, Jhiriyatola, Jaithari , District- Anuppur, M.P. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Pendra, District- Gaurela- Pendra Marwahi (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Preetam Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 03.12.2025 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. 80 of 2025, registered at Police Station- Pendra, District- Gaurela- Pendra Marwahi (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2), 112(2), 3(5) of the BNS. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. According to the prosecution, the complainant- Ramu Prasad Kaushik lodged a written complaint stating that he had purchased a used tractor bearing registration number CG 10 AN 5262 for Rs.1,00,000/- from one Inder Singh. On 17.03.2025, the complainant received delivery of the tractor and parked it outside his residence. However, the next morning, upon waking, he discovered that the tractor had been stolen. Acting upon the complaint, a case was registered, and the present bail application is filed on behalf of the applicant, who is implicated in the said offence. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been arrested in this plotted case made by the prosecution. Further, co-accused, namely, Sahil Rathore, Shivam Kumar Rathore, Shivam Rathore and Mrigendra Rathore @ Ankit have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No.7818/2025, MCRC No. 7610/2025 and MCRC No. 7449/2025, respectively vide order dated 06.10.2025, 22.09.2025 and 16.09.2025 and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused persons. So far as criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, applicant has only one previous criminal antecedent registered against him, the same has been explained in para 4(A) of the bail application. The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.08.2025, though the charge-sheet has been filed, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, he submits that the present applicant is also entitled to 3 be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant but could not dispute that the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted by this Court and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co- accused. 5. 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, Sahil Rathore, Shivam Kumar Rathore, Shivam Rathore and Mrigendra Rathore @ Ankit have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No.7818/2025, MCRC No. 7610/2025 and MCRC No. 7449/2025, respectively vide order dated 06.10.2025, 22.09.2025 and 16.09.2025 and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused persons, charge-sheet has already been filed and he is languishing in jail since 01.08.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 6. 6. Let applicant, Yuvraj Rathore, involved in Crime No. 80 of 2025, registered at Police Station- Pendra, District- Gaurela- Pendra Marwahi (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2), 112(2), 3(5) of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following 4 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 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 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) 5 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. 7. Office 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 Rahul Dewangan