1 2026:CGHC:6875 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 561 of 2026 Ratan Mahanand S/o Dharmu Mahanand, Aged About 20 Years R/o Ramkund, Uchhla Talab, Behind Chotki Kirana Stores, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Azad Chowk District Raipur C.G. ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Parvesh Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06/02/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 345/2025 registered at Police Station- Azad Chowk, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 304(2), 296 and 351(2) of B.N.S. 2. As per the prosecution story, on 17.11.2025 at about 6:00 PM, the complainant was returning from duty on his motorcycle bearing Registration No. CG-04-MJ-0573. During the journey, the KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 complainant stopped on the road for some work. At that time, the applicant requested a lift for a short distance. Thereafter, near the old liquor shop, the applicant asked the complainant to stop the motorcycle, snatched the keys of the bike and after abusing him and threatening to kill him with a knife, forcibly took away ₹2,200/- from the complainant and fled from the spot. Based upon such, the crime has been registered against him for the aforesaid offences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 26.11.2025 and is about 20 years of age, his continued detention at such a young age along with hardened criminals is likely to have a serious adverse impact on his future career. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed and, therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. He further submits that the FIR was initially lodged against an unknown person and the applicant has been arrested merely on presumption, as there is no eye-witness to the alleged incident. The applicant has no criminal antecedent and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. Learned State Counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the applicant/accused snatched the complainant’s motorcycle key, abused him, threatened him with a knife and forcibly took ₹2,200/- before fleeing. During investigation, the complainant identified the applicant and from his possession the police seized the complainant’s Aadhaar Card, PAN Card, and 3 ₹600/- cash, as reflected in the case diary and also considering the fact that the applicant has one criminal antecedent under the Arms Act. Considering the gravity of the offence and the material collected, the applicant is not entitled to be released 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 levelled against the applicant and the recovery made from him and further the fact that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has only one criminal antecedent under the Arms Act and he is in jail since 26.11.2025, the conclusion of the trial will take some more time, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let the applicant – Ratan Mahanand, involved in Crime No. 345/2025 registered at Police Station- Azad Chowk, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 304(2), 296 and 351(2) of B.N.S, 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 4 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 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. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dirurt fo forthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal