1 2026:CGHC:6006 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1146 of 2026 Chahat Sen S/o Shri Lekhram Sen, Aged About 23 Years R/o Dharamnagar Pachpedi Naka, Police Station Tikrapara, Raipur , District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Police Station New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur , District- Raipur (C.G.) .... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.02.2026 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. 220/2025 registered at Police Station New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4) and 3(5) of BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the complainant, Dikeshwar Sahu, was working as a delivery boy with Zomato. On 08.09.2025, at about 11:45 PM, he visited Anna Punjabi Restaurant KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 to collect a parcel on his motorcycle (Suzuki Scooty) bearing Registration No. C.G.04NK5841. At that time, two unknown persons, riding a black-colored motorcycle, followed him, stopped him, and threatened him with a knife. They assaulted the complainant and looted his Samsung Galaxy A-16 mobile phone (Sky Blue colour) bearing IMEI Nos. 355466591427020 and 356953921427027, valued at ₹15,000/-, and fled from the spot. Based upon such, aforementioned offence was registered against the unknown persons and during the course of investigation, the applicant along with co-accused have been arrested on the basis of memorandum statement and from the possession of the present applicant, one Samsung Galaxy A-16 has been recovered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case and has not committed any offence. It is further submitted that, as per the material collected by the prosecution, no offence is made out against the applicant and there is nothing on record to show that he committed any loot. The seizure memo prepared by the prosecution is stated to be false, and even prima facie no case is made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that in the present case the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, the same have already been explained in paragraph No. 4(a) of the bail application 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 bail application and submits 3 that the offence is serious in nature, involving robbery at night by threatening the complainant with a knife. It is submitted that during the course of investigation, the present applicant was arrested on the basis of memorandum statement and the looted Samsung Galaxy A-16 mobile phone has been recovered from his possession, which directly connects him with the commission of the offence. The seizure is duly supported by the case diary material. It is further submitted that the applicant has four criminal antecedents, which shows his habitual involvement in criminal activities. Considering the gravity of the offence, the manner in which it was committed, the recovery made from the applicant and his criminal record, the present applicant is not entitled to the grant of 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 case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 14.09.2025 and recovery made from him and further 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) and no further interrogation is required and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant – Chahat Sen, involved in Crime No. 220/2025 registered at Police Station New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur District- 4 Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4) and 3(5) of BNS, 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 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 5 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavor to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of six months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 10. 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 Kunal