1 2025:CGHC:7327 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1182 of 2025 1. Bannu Gadtiya S/o Suresh Gadtiya Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Navapara, Police Station - Balauda, Distt. - Mahasamund Chhattisgarh 2. Rupanand Behra S/o Chhabilal Behra Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Balauda, Police Station - Balauda, Distt. - Mahasamund Chhattisgarh … Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through SHO, Police Station - Saraipali, District - Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vaibhav A. Goverdhan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/02/2025 1 The applicants have preferred this First 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. 262/2024, registered at Police Station – Saraipali, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 296, 309(4), 351(2), 311, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘B.N.S.’) and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act. (As per final report). PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.02.10 18:51:41 +0530 2 2 The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 06.10.2024, the victim Mahadev Seth lodged an FIR alleging that on 21.08.2024 in the morning at about 05:00 am, when he was going to Saraipali, at that time, two persons came on motorcycle and intercepted him and on that point of knife, Rs. 13,500/- has been looted from him. But, he did not make any report. On 06.10.2024, he came to know that some persons have been arrested in similar kind of crime, then he went to Police Station and identified them and lodged report. 3 It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that there is no material evidence available against the applicants, which connects them in commission of crime. He also submits that there is an inordinate delay of more than 45 days in lodging the report and as per the FIR itself, the victim has not properly seen the applicants and therefore, the question of their identification does not arise. He later submitted that the applicant No. 1 has two previous criminal antecedents and applicant No. 2 has one previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant are in jail since 07.10.2024 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 and submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submitted that when the victim was going to Saraipali, at that time, two persons came on motorcycle and intercepted him and on that point of knife, Rs. 13,500/- has been looted from him. He further submitted that the applicant No. 1 has two previous criminal antecedents and applicant No. 2 has one previous 3 criminal antecedents. Therefore, they are not entitled to be released on bail. 5 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6 Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that the injuries sustained by the victim is simple in nature and further, the applicant No. 1 has two previous criminal antecedents and applicant No. 2 has one previous criminal antecedents, the charge- sheet has been filed and they are in jail since 07.10.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7 Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 -Bannu Gadtiya and Rupanand Behra , involved in Crime No. 262/2024, registered at Police Station – Saraipali, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 296, 309(4), 351(2), 311, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘B.N.S.’) and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two 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 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 4 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 misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their 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 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 Preeti