1 2025:CGHC:59774 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9685 of 2025 1 - Jivan Thakur (Died And Deleted) As Per Honble Court Order Dated 09- 12-2025. 2 - Sopsingh Netam S/o Late Shiv Prasad Netam Aged About 66 Years R/o Village Mayana, Tahsil Charama, District- Uttar Baster Kanker (C.G.) 3 - Niraj Kumar S/o Jivan Thakur Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Mayana, Tahsil Charama, District- Uttar Baster Kanker (C.G.) ...Applicants versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Charama, District- Uttar Baster Kanker (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Parag Kotecha Gupta, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09.12.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 123/2025 registered at Police Station – Charama District – Uttar Baster Kanker (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.12.10 12:17:56 +0530 2 467, 468 & 34 of the IPC and Section 340 & 318(4) of the BNS 2023. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that it was an allegation against the applicants in connivance with others, accused person and caused a loss of Rs. 5,17,773/- to the Government by forging and fraudulently obtaining illegal forest Right Certificate. Hence an offence under aforesaid section was registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He also submits that That the applicants were arrested solely on the basis of suspicion, and no specific allegation has been raised against them; that there is a huge delay in lodging the FIR, for which no proper explanation has been offered; that the applicants have no involvement in the alleged crime, have received no amount, and have nothing to do with the incident; that Applicant No. 1 and 2 are suffering from high blood pressure and diabetes, and Applicant No. 3, being only about 23 years old, will face severe consequences if he remains in jail; that suspicion, however strong, cannot establish guilt unless proven, and no material has been collected by the prosecution to substantiate the suspicion; that there is no direct evidence against the applicants, and the ingredients of the alleged offence have not been fulfilled, while the police unnecessarily implicated them in the case; that the applicants are innocent, neither committed nor participated in the alleged crime, and there is no iota of evidence linking them to it; that the applicants have been falsely implicated with no intention or motive to commit the alleged crime, and there is no prima facie evidence of their involvement; that the FIR was lodged with delay and 3 without proper justification; and that the applicants have been in judicial custody since 12.10.2025,therefore, they prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the present applicants, and also taking into account that anticipatory bail has been granted to the co- accused by this Court in MCRCA Nos. 1892 of 2025 and 1917 of 2025 vide orders dated 03.12.2025 and 04.12.2025, that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, and that the applicants have been in judicial custody since 12.10.2025 and that the conclusion of the trial may take considerable time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let the applicants – Sopsingh Netam and Niraj Kumar, involved in Crime No. 123/2025 registered at Police Station – Charama District – Uttar Baster Kanker (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 34 of the IPC and Section 340 & 318(4) of the BNS 2023, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties each 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 4 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 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. 8. 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 Vaibhav