1 2025:CGHC:53099 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7634 of 2025 • Sunil Chauhan @ Appu S/o Late Shri Salik Ram Chauhan Aged About 42 Years R/o Shanti Nagar, Behind Hanuman Mandir, P.S. Mohan Nagar, Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station, Gudiyari, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Cause Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbh Sharma, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 30.10.2025 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 83/2025 registered at Police Station Gudiyari, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 331(3), 309(6) & 318(4) of BNS. 2. The applicant had preferred a first bail applicantion bearing MCRC No. 3992 of 2025 was rejected vide order dated 20.05.2025 and after that he preferred Second bail application for granting regular bail. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.11.01 11:03:02 +0530 2 3. Facts of the case are that on 24.02.2025 complainant made a complaint stating that on 24.02.2025 at about 14.30, two unknown persons who have covered their faces forcefully entered in her house, tapped her mouth and kept a knife on her neck and thereafter asked for the key’s of her Almirah. They broke the Almira with the help of an iron rod and stolen her fold’s ornaments weighing around 26-27 tola (260-270 grams), Silver ornaments of total weight of approximately 132 tola (1320 grams) and cash of Rs.1,00,000/- and tied her legs and locked from outside. However, she managed to call her landlord and lodged the complaint. Hence, the FIR. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant had preferred a first bail applicantion bearing MCRC No. 3992 of 2025 which was rejected vide order dated 20.05.2025. He also submits that as per the status of the trial out of 17 witnesses only 5 seizure witnesses have been examined and they have turned hostile and there is no recovery has been made from the present applicant. The applicant is in jail since 28.02.2025 and the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that theft ornaments have been recovered from the possession of the present applicant and other co-accused, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second bail application of the applicant, first bail application bearing MCRC No. 3992 of 2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.05.2025 3 and submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, applicant has no criminal antecedents, charge-sheet has been filed, applicant is in jail since 28.02.2025, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case to enlarge the applicant of bail. 8. Let applicant, Sunil Chouhan @ Appu, involved in Crime No. 83/2025 registered at Police Station Gudiyari, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 331(3), 309(6) & 318(4) of 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 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. (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 4 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. 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 vaishali