1 2026:CGHC:10264 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1924 of 2026 Shekh Suleman @ Rajan S/o Shekh Bacchu, Aged About 29 Years R/o F-62, Near Aatabagh Matiya, P.S. Garden Reach, District 24 Parghana, Kolkata, West Bengal ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Gudhiyari, District Raipur C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Gajanand, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anusha Naik, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27/02/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 327/2025 registered at Police Station AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Gudhiyari, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111, 3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a report at Police Station Gudhiyari stating that on 22.06.2025 at about 7:00 AM, while purchasing vegetables at Pahadi Chowk, Gudhiyari, he discovered that his mobile phone had been stolen from his pocket. Subsequently, an amount of Rs.99,000/- was withdrawn through PhonePe from his account. During investigation, it was found that the present applicant had received the stolen amount. On the basis of the said allegations, the police registered Crime No. 327/2025 at Police Station Gudhiyari, District Raipur (C.G.) for offences punishable under Sections 303(2), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of the BNS against the applicant and other co-accused. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that three identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Vikas Mehto, Sonu Kumar and Pintu Mohli have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 05.02.2026 and 05.02.2026 in MCRC Nos.10116 of 2025 and 10519 of 2025. The applicant is in jail since 22.07.2025, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that though the applicant has no criminal antecedent, but the applicant allegedly received the amount of Rs.99,000/-, which was fraudulently withdrawn from the complainant’s account after theft of his mobile phone, and thereby was involved in the offence along with other co-accused persons. Therefore, the 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, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 22.07.2025, the fact that though the applicant allegedly received the amount of Rs.99,000/-, which was fraudulently withdrawn from the complainant’s account after theft of his mobile phone, but considering the fact that three identically situated co- accused persons, namely, Vikas Mehto, Sonu Kumar and Pintu Mohli have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 05.02.2026 and 05.02.2026 in MCRC Nos.10116 of 2025 and 10519 of 2025 and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 4 8. Let the Applicant-Shekh Suleman @ Rajan, involved in Crime No. 327/2025 registered at Police Station Gudhiyari, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111, 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 sufficient 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 5 opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient 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. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil