1 2026:CGHC:5270 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1015 of 2026 Rahul Sonkar S/o Daulat Sonkar Aged About 21 Years R/o Lakhenagar, Water Tank, Near Godwana Gas Agency, Police Station - Azad Chowk, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Amleshwar, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Tarun Dansena, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 30/01/2026 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. 158/2025 registered at Police Station- Amleshwar District- Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 305(A), 331(4), 3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a report at Police Station Amleshwar on 28.11.2025, stating that his KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 brother, along with his family members, had gone out of town on 20.11.2025 at about 10:30 PM. It is further reported that on the same day, the complainant received a phone call from his brother, who informed him that a neighbor had contacted him and disclosed that the lock of his house had been found broken, indicating that a theft had taken place. Upon entering the house, it was found that the household articles were lying scattered and gold and silver jewellery kept in the cupboard were missing. The said articles had been stolen by unknown persons. During the course of investigation, the police arrested the three accused persons. On the basis of the report, an offence under Sections 305A, 331(4), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) have been registered agianst the accused. After completion of the entire investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class , District Durg (C.G.). 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 as alleged by the prosecution. During the course of investigation, nothing incriminating has been recovered from the present applicant except the alleged memorandum, which by itself has no evidentiary value, and there is no test identification or any other identification connecting the applicant with the alleged offence. The applicant was neither involved in the alleged theft nor did he provide any assistance to the co-accused either before or after the incident. The story put forth by the complainant appears doubtful and unreliable, as the alleged theft is said to have been 3 committed by unknown persons, yet names have been introduced without any credible basis. In the present case, the charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of early conclusion of the trial. Hence, he is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submitted that the allegations against the present applicant are serious in nature. It is submitted that during the course of investigation, a gold chain (mala) has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, which directly connects him with the commission of the offence. The said recovery constitutes material evidence and clearly indicates the involvement of the applicant in the alleged crime. Though the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and it is acknowledged that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the gravity of the offence and the recovery of stolen property from his possession are sufÏcient grounds to deny the benefit of bail at this stage. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, recovery made from the applicant, period of detention of the applicant since 29.11.2025 and the fact that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and no further interrogation is required and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without further 4 commenting anything merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let the applicant – Rahul Sonkar, involved in Crime No. 158/2025 registered at Police Station- Amleshwar District- Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 305(A), 331(4), 3(5) of BNS, 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 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 5 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. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal