1 2025:CGHC:56169 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8375 of 2025 • Ramjeet Prajapati S/o Shri Barsati Prajapati Aged About 40 Years Occupation Labour, R/o Village Parudeva, Police Station - Bhitthi, District Ambedkarnagar, (U.P.) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Udaypur, District - Surguja, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Mahendra Dubey and Mr. Suresh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 18.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this Second Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.261/2024, registered at Police Station – Udaypur, District – Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 143(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the applicant along with co- accused Rajesh Chauhan and Mangluram Pando, was taking minor VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.11.20 11:05:34 +0530 2 children for labor work at a brick kiln in Banaras (U.P) without the the permission of their parents. At that time, the police apprehending them and rescued the minors i.e. a total of six children including four girls and two boys, aged between 13 to 17 years. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case and the first bail application filed by the applicant was rejected in MCRC No.861 of 2025 vide order dated 21.02.2025 and submits that applicant was never taking the minor children for the labour work, only on the basis of suspicion, he has been arrested in this case. He further submits that there are total 23 witnesses, out of which only 9 witnesses have been examined, who have turned hostile. He further submits that there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 26.12.2024 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the applicant, along with co-accused persons, was taking minor children for labor work at a brick kiln in Banaras (U.P.) without the permission of their parents. At that time, the police apprehended them and rescued the minors i.e. a total of six children, including four girls and two boys, aged between 13 to 17 years, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there is no any criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 26.12.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, looking to the detention period of the applicant, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Ramjeet Prajapati, involved in Crime No.261/2024, registered at Police Station – Udaypur, District – Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 143(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local 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 4 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 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. 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 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