1 2026:CGHC:20758 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1604 of 2026 Chandan Chelak S/o - Jhumka Chelak Aged About 19 Years R/o Village- Kachna Housing Board, H. No. 16, B S U P Colony, Block No. 33, P.S. Khamhardih, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Mana Camp, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 04/05/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 303/2025 registered at Police Station Mana Camp, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(3), 305, 3(5) of BNS. 2. As per the prosecution story, the complainant lodged an FIR before the concerned police station stating therein that on 22.09.2025, KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 between 09:00 AM and 05:00 PM, at the house of the complainant, Anil Baghel, situated in Vidhayak Colony, Dharampura, Raipur, the latch of the lock affixed to the front door was broken and after entering the house, an unknown person committed theft of a gold necklace, mangalsutra, earrings, and silver ornaments worth Rs. 1,00,000/- from the almirah kept inside the room. On the report lodged by the complainant, Crime No. 303/2025 was registered at Police Station Mana Camp against an unknown person under Sections 331(3) and 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and the matter was taken up for investigation. During the course of investigation, the applicant/accused was arrested and on the basis of his memorandum statement, the aforesaid stolen ornaments of the complainant were recovered from his possession. After completing other necessary investigation, a charge-sheet has been filed against him before the competent Court under the aforesaid sections. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the entire prosecution case rests solely on the alleged memorandum statement and the name of the applicant does not find place in the FIR, which was initially registered against an unknown person and his subsequent implication casts serious doubt on the genuineness of the prosecution story and his alleged involvement. It is also contended that the trial is likely to take considerable time and continued incarceration of the applicant would amount to pre-trial punishment, particularly when the 3 applicant is a young person aged about 19 years and prolonged detention at such a tender age would cause irreparable harm to his future. It is further submitted that the applicant has a total of five criminal antecedents, out of which two cases are of a similar nature, as explained in detail in paragraph No. 4(A) of the bail application and in view of the aforesaid circumstances, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant has a total of six criminal antecedents, out of which only five cases have been explained in paragraph No. 4(A) of the bail application, while one antecedent remains unexplained. It is further submitted that jewellery worth Rs. 1,00,000/- has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, which clearly connects him with the alleged offence, and therefore, the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing 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 25.09.2025 and the recovery made from him and the fact that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and also considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant as explained in the bail application of para No.4(A) further the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore without further commenting anything on merits, I am 4 inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let the applicant – Chandan Chelak, involved in Crime No. 303/2025 registered at Police Station Mana Camp, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(3), 305, 3(5) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 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 5 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 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance.diurt fo forthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal