1 2025:CGHC:55435 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8135 of 2025 Irshad Ansari S/o Israfil Ansari Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Bhadgaon, P.S. Senha, Distt. Lohardaga, Jharkhand. --- Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sho Of Police Station Punjipathara, And Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. --- Non-applicant MCRC No. 8216 of 2025 Wahid Ansari S/o Jumma Ansari Aged About 24 Years R/o Arru Bandhtoli, Police Station Senha, District : Lohardaga, Jharkhand ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, Raigarh (Police Station - Punjipathra, Tahsil Gharghoda, District Raigarh C.G.) --- Non-applicant MCRC No. 8135/2025 For Applicant : Mr. Abhishek Saraf, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Nitansh Kumar Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer MCRC No. 8216/2025 For Applicant : Mr. Vivek Bhakta, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Nitansh Kumar Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer SB : Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice ORDER ON BOARD 13/11/2025 1. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants 2 who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 132/2025 registered at Police Station – Punjipathra, District – Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 316 (3), 338, 336 (3), 112 (2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution's case is that, on 20-05-2025 the complainant namely, Driti Sundar Behra who is the Chief Security Officer, Singhal Steel and Power Pvt. Ltd. Taraimal, lodged written complaint at Police Station - Punjipathara against unknown person that, alleging that on 04-05-2025 at around 9:40, transporter of Ajay Ambe Carrier, Raipur namely, Sandeep Kumar Singh received a phone call from Mobile No. 6205538820 stating that, truck number JH-10-BX-4366, who identified himself as Rakesh Kumar is currently unloading goods at BS Sponge Plant. If the complainant’s organization has any goods for transportation to Raipur, he will load it and deliver it to Raipur. Upon request, HB Wire 12 SWG was loaded from his place and sent to Jai Hanuman Steel GE Road, Raipur. Since the transporter had also received a call from Raipur in this regard, therefore, when the applicants brought the said truck, he took the applicant’s driving license, owner's PAN card and photocopy of vehicle related documents as identification and got 30.270 MT HB Wire 12 SWG worth Rs. 16,58,037/- loaded and gave the applicant/driver e-way bill number 871527237893, 841527237399 dated 04.05.2025, challan number SD25Y-01611, SD25Y01610, LR Number 42850 for transportation to Jai Hanuman Steel G.E. Road, Raipur at 8:20 pm, but on 05.05.2025 at 10:00 am, when the driver did not deliver the goods to the destination, the mobile numbers given by the driver were contacted but the mobile was switched off. On the basis of such report offences punishable under section 316(3), 338, 336(3), 112(2) of the of B.N.S has been registered and the applicants/accused have been arrested on 29.07.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the respective applicants submit that the present 3 applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case, they have not committed any offence as alleged. Mr. Abhishek Saraf learned counsel for the applicant in MCRC No. 8135/2025 submits that the allegation against the applicant is that he was the driver of the truck and therefore, his job was only to transport the vehicle to the given place. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, he submits that there are no previous antecedents pending against the applicant. Investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been filed before the competent court and applicant is in jail since 29.05.2025. Therefore, they may be enlarged on bail. 4. Mr. Vivek Bhakta, learned counsel for the applicant in MCRC No. 8216/2025 submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime. Further, he submits that prima faice there is no direct material or evidence available against the applicant. Applicant is in jail since 23.05.2025, offence is triable by Judicial Magistrate First Class, there is no chance of absconding of the applicant. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, he submits that there are two criminal antecedents (Crime No. 100/2022, P.S. Burmu, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand and Crime No. 83/2023, P.S. Karra, District – Khunti, Jharkhand) against the applicant which is pending adjudication. He submits that the similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 25.09.2025 in M.Cr.C. No. 7760/2025. Investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been filed, 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 charge-sheet is submitted before the competent Court in the present case. Further, he submits that there specific allegations against the respective applicants of committing theft of the goods belonging the complainant which was to be transported by them. However, 4 she do not dispute the submission of counsel for the respective applicants regarding the criminal antecedents against the Applicant i.e. Wahid Anasari, however, he submits that there is one criminal antecedent against the applicant Irashad Ansari in the State of Jharkhand and submits that considering the seriousness of the offences, the risk of tampering with evidence, and the prima facie material collected, it is submitted that the bail application deserves to be dismissed. 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 and the fact that the co-accused person have been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 25.09.2025 in M.Cr.C. No. 7760/2025, 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. 8. Let the Applicants – Irshad Ansari in MCRC No. 8135/2025 and Wahid Ansari in MCRC No. 8216/2025, involved in Crime No. 132/2025 registered at Police Station – Punjipathra, District – Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 316 (3), 338, 336 (3), 112 (2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on each of them 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 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 5 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 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