1 2026:CGHC:21202 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4231 of 2026 Ritesh Kurrey S/o. Shri Iswhar Kurrey Aged About 21 Years R/o. Kohroud P.S. Valan Dist.- Balodabazar (C.G.) Halmuqam Tendu Patta Godam Beside Baluda Zero Point Vidhansabha Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Aarang, Dist.- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vikeshveri, Advocate For State/ Non-applicant : Ms. Ankita Shukla, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 06.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.23/2026, registered at Police Station : Aarang, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.05.07 19:17:43 +0530 2 punishable under Sections 303(2), 3(5) of Indian Penal Code. 2. Case of the prosecution story, as per the FIR, is that the complainant Dinesh Kurrey Soni, resident of Samoda, District Raipur, appeared at Police Station Aarang and lodged a report stating that on 26.12.2025 at about 16:00 hours, while he was present at his jewellery shop, an unknown person came to purchase a gold locket weighing about 5.5 grams. It is alleged that two lockets were shown to the said person, out of which he allegedly picked up one locket and fled from the shop without making payment or informing anyone. It is further alleged that when the complainant tried to chase and apprehend him, the said unknown person escaped with another person on a motorcycle. On the basis of the said report, a crime was registered at Crime No. 23/2026, Police Station Aarang, District Raipur (C.G.) against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and there is no credible evidence connecting him with the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has two criminal antecedents, which are not of similar nature and do 3 not indicate involvement in the present offence. It is also submitted that the order of detention dated 01.02.2026 has been wrongly relied upon and does not justify continued incarceration of the applicant. Hence, he is entitled to be released on bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant has been rightly implicated on the basis of material collected during investigation. It is further submitted that the applicant is having two criminal antecedents, out of which one case is pending trial, which reflect his criminal propensity. It is also submitted that the order of detention dated 01.02.2026 indicates his involvement in similar unlawful activities. It is further contended that charge-sheet has already been filed and sufÏcient prima facie material exists against the applicant. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, it is submitted that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the 4 case, including the order of detention dated 01.02.2026, the fact that charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and that the applicant has two previous criminal antecedents, this Court is of the view that the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Without commenting on the merits of the case and considering the overall facts and circumstances, I am inclined to allow the application and grant bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly the bail application is allowed. Let the Applicant – Ritesh Kurrey, involved in Crime No.23/2026, registered at Police Station : Aarang, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 3(5) of Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on 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 5 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 misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS is issued and the applicant fail 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, 6 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Arpan