1 2025:CGHC:8687 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 982 of 2025 Ritesh Netam S/o Kamlesh Netam Aged About 21 Years R/o Housing Borad Colony Kachna P.S. Khamardih District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The P.S. Mana Camp Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. N. Naha Roy, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Sakib Ahmed, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.02.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 414/2024, registered at Police Station : Mana Camp Raipur, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305 and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 24.09.2024 at around 5:30 PM, the complainant, Rajendra Vishwakarma, a Head Constable at PTS Mana Camp, Raipur (CG), locked his house, handed the keys to his neighbor, and left for Narsinghpur (M.P.) with his wife. On 25.09.2024, his neighbor informed him that the RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 lock on his house was broken and a burglary had occurred. During the burglary, valuable gold ornaments, including six gold kangan, six gold rings, one gold chain, two pairs of gold jhumka, one pair of silver payal, and several other items were found missing. The complainant subsequently filed a report at Mana Camp Police Station, Raipur (CG) on 26.09.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the prosecution has prepared a concocted case and the same is not substantiated with suitable evidence. He further submits that the co-accused person namely, Jyoti Soni has already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 604/2025 vide order dated 22.01.2025. He also submits that the police has registered the offence against the unknown person and arrested the applicant only on the basis of suspicion. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 29.09.2024, the applicant has 04 criminal antecedents which is explained in the covering memo, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant and co-accused committed theft at the house of the complainant, Rajendra Vishwakarma. The stolen items reportedly included ornaments, cash, and other articles valued at approximately 3 Rs. 2,00,000/-, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 29.09.2024, the fact that though the applicant and co- accused committed theft at the house of the complainant, Rajendra Vishwakarma, the stolen items reportedly included ornaments, cash, and other articles, further the applicant has 04 criminal antecedents, but the said criminal cases has been explained in the covering memo and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant – Ritesh Netam, involved in Crime No. 414/2024, registered at Police Station : Mana Camp Raipur, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305 and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing 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 4 court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient 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 statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient 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. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan