1 2025:CGHC:52454 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6936 of 2025 1 - Iftekhar Shekh S/o Yakub Shekh Aged About 29 Years R/o Kodatarai, P.S.- Jutemill Raigarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.) 2 - Armish Shekh W/o Mohammed Iqbal Aged About 25 Years R/o- Ward No. 15 Chandrapur, Tehsil Dabhra, District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Jutemill Raigarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants : Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27/10/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.152/2025 registered at Police Station Jutemill, District- Raigarh GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.10.28 18:12:35 +0530 2 (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 199, 200, 419, 467, 468 and 34 of IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Investigating Officer namely Girdhari Lal Sao received information on 27/04/2025 that two Pakistani citizens are residing in Kondatarai, Raigarh District - Raigarh, the station house officer went on the spot and upon enquiring it was found that the applicants who are citizen of Pakistan are living with their father who is a Indian national citizen. The I.O. directed the applicants to produce their documents upon which the applicants produce their Passport, Aadhaar Card, Voter ID card and bank passbook of state bank of India of district Raigarh. Upon inquiring from the election commission of India in the form the applicants had mention themselves as Indian national citizens and have taken advantage of different schemes by the State Government therefore the present offences were registered against the applicants for filing wrong declaration in their identity cards issued by the Government of India. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case as the FIR is based merely on an inadvertent mistake in the declaration form. He would submit that the applicants’ mother, originally from Raigarh (C.G.), married a Muslim citizen and converted to Islam. The applicants were born and raised in India and have been residing in Chhattisgarh since 2013. He would submit that the applicants and their mother possess valid residential permits issued by the State Government, and their visas have been regularly extended by the competent authority since 2013. There has never been any dispute regarding their visa status or nationality. He 3 would submit that the applicants applied for Indian citizenship before the Collector in 2022, which is still pending consideration and instead of processing their request, they have been arrested without any proper inquiry. He would submit that the entire case is based on a minor mistake in selecting “Indian” as nationality in a voter ID form, without any criminal intent. He would submit that the applicants are students and all government identity cards—Aadhaar, PAN, and Voter ID—were issued by competent authorities after due verification. He would further submit that the alleged incident pertains to 2022, but the FIR was lodged only in 2025, with no explanation for the delay and the applicants have no previous criminal record. He would submit that Aadhaar cards were issued lawfully by the Government of India, which permits foreign nationals residing in India for more than 12 months to obtain Aadhaar and applicant No. 2 is a woman. He would submit that applicants are permanent residents as stated in the cause title, ready to furnish adequate surety, and shall comply with all conditions imposed by this Court. He would submit that the charge sheet has been filed in this case, the applicants are in jail since 27/04/2025 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and he would submit that charge sheet has been filed in this case before the competent court. 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, 4 nature of allegation levelled against the applicants, period of detention of the applicants since 27/04/2025, charge sheet has been filed and also considering the fact that trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the Applicants- Iftekhar Shekh & Armish Shekh, involved in Crime No.152/2025 registered at Police Station Jutemill, District- Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 199, 200, 419, 467, 468 and 34 of IPC, 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 they 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 their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the 5 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 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. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri