1 2026:CGHC:21219 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3378 of 2026 Suresh Sonjhara S/o Late Chamanlal Sonjhara , Aged About 45 Years R/o New Subhash Nagar, Police Station Tikrapara, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Mujgahan, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Akash Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06.05.2026 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. 148/2025 registered at Police Station – Mujgahan, District - Raipur (C.G.) offence under Sections 331(4), 305 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant, Amar Dixit, lodged a report at Police Station Mujgahan, District Raipur (C.G.), stating that on 04.06.2025 at about 7:00 AM, he locked his house and went along with his family to his ancestral village, Lau Pathak Purwa, District Raebareli (Uttar Pradesh), to attend his child’s tonsure ceremony (Mundan ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.05.07 11:42:59 +0530 2 Sanskar). After participating in the ceremony and other family functions, he returned from the village to Raipur on 01.07.2025 at about 8:30 AM. Upon opening the main door and entering the house, he noticed that the lock of the upstairs room door was broken, the articles in the room were scattered, and the lock of the Godrej almirah was also broken. On checking the contents of the almirah, he found that one pair of gold earrings worth about Rs. 21,000/- and five pairs of silver anklets worth about Rs. 15,000/- which were kept in the locker, were missing. An unknown person had climbed into the house through the balcony, broken open the door of the upstairs room and the almirah, and stolen gold and silver ornaments worth about Rs. 36,000/-. On the basis of the said report, Police Station Mujgahan registered Crime No. 148/2025 against unknown persons under Sections 331(4) and 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and took up the investigation. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant belongs to the Sonjhar community, which has traditionally been engaged in gold cleaning and the repair of gold and silver ornaments for generations. Members of this tribal community carry out such work in Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, and other states. The applicant is engaged in gold cleaning and jewellery repair work in Raipur (C.G.) and has earned the trust and confidence of local gold traders, who regularly entrust him with such work. However, to date, no trader or individual has ever lodged any complaint or FIR against him at any police station. He further submits that although the applicant has some prior criminal records, he has never been convicted by any court of law. It is also submitted that Police Station Mujgahan, Raipur (C.G.), had previously falsely implicated the applicant in other criminal cases, in 3 which he has since been acquitted by the learned trial Court. The applicant is not a member of any criminal gang. Being illiterate, his signatures were allegedly obtained on blank papers, and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the memorandum witnesses, seizure witnesses, arrest witnesses, and the complainant have not supported the prosecution case and have stated that they signed the relevant documents at the instance of the police. None of the prosecution witnesses have supported the police version or the charge-sheet. Since the charge-sheet has already been filed, there remains no possibility of the applicant influencing the witnesses. He also submits that although the applicant has eight criminal antecedents under the BNS, he has already been acquitted in five cases, while the remaining three cases are still pending trial, for which an explanation has been provided in paragraph No. 4(a) of the present bail application. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 21.08.2025, and as the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the alleged stolen article were recovered from the possession of the present applicant, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of 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 and the fact that the applicant has 08 criminal antecedents under the BNS, he has already been acquitted in 05 cases, while the remaining three cases are still pending trial, for which an explanation has been provided in 4 paragraph No. 4(a) of the present bail application. Moreover, the fact that in the present bail application the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the present applicant has been in jail since 21.08.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Suresh Sonjhara, involved in Crime No. 148/2025 registered at Police Station – Mujgahan, District - Raipur (C.G.) offence under Sections 331(4), 305 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his 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 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 5 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek