1 2026:CGHC:386 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9865 of 2025 Suklal Bhoi S/o Pusau Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Chhindpatera, Police Station Dongripali, Tahsil Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Forest Range Gomarda, Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shikhar Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 05.01.2026 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 4579/2025, registered at Police Station – Officer, Forest Range Gomarda, Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 02, 09, 29, 39(d), 44(A)(5) Section VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.06 10:38:20 +0530 2 49(B)(4), 50 & 51 of the C.G. Wild Life Protection Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the FIR was registered against co-accused persons Ramu and Laxman, that they have killed one wild boar and some parts of meat was recovered from them on 16-10-2025 and during the investigation, the offence also got registered against the present applicant that he helped the other co-accused persons by laying electric wire for killing the wild boar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. It is further submitted that he was arrested only on suspicion and was not present at the spot at the time of the incident. The applicant has neither committed nor participated in any act which may amount to the offences alleged against him, and the evidence collected by the prosecution is not prima facie sufficient to hold him guilty of the said offences. It is further submitted that the police registered the FIR and made seizure of meat only against the co- accused persons, namely Ramu and Laxman, whereas the present applicant has been implicated solely on the basis of their memorandum statements. The co-accused Ramu and Laxman have already been granted the benefit of regular bail by the learned Court below vide order dated 25.10.2025, a copy of which is filed as Annexure A-3. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 18.11.2025, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been 3 filed in the present case. 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, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the fact that the other co-accused, namely Ramu and Laxman, have already been granted bail by the trial Court, that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, charge-sheet has already been filed, applicant has been in judicial custody since 18.11.2025, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. 7. Let applicant, Suklal Bhoi, involved in Crime No. 4579/2025, registered at Police Station – Officer, Forest Range Gomarda, Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 02, 09, 29, 39(d), 44(A)(5) Section 49(B) (4), 50 & 51 of the C.G. Wild Life Protection Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 4 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 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. 8. Office 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 vaibhav