1 2026:CGHC:13812 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2661 of 2026 Dinesh Goswami S/o Shri Brijlal Goswami, Aged About 24 Years R/o Village- Kesla, Chowki- Kotmi, Police Station- Pendra, Tehsil- Sakola, District- Gaurela- Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Gaurela, District – Gaurela-Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shyam Kumar, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 23.03.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 289/2022, registered at Police Station – Gaurela, District – Gaurela- Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 457, 380 and 34 of the IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the complainant, Shri Ganga Prasad Rathore, lodged a report stating that on 08.07.2022, after locking one room of his house, he and his family members went to sleep in the adjacent room after having dinner at around 09:00p.m. It is alleged that 09.07.2022, at about 04:00 a.m., when the complainant woke up, he found that the door of the locked on room was open and RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 the lock was broken. Upon inspection, it was discovered that the box kept inside the said room was missing. The said box contained gems worth Rs.50,430/-, one gold mangalsutra, a locket, phuliya, jhumka, a pair of silver anklets, a hop kardhan, brass utensils, a plate, wallet, and clothes all amounting to approximately Rs.90,000/-. It was further alleged that the box was later found discarded in a field at some distance from his house. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested for the crime in question. Hence, this application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there are 07 criminal antecedents of the applicant out of which in 06 cases the applicant has been acquitted. It is further submitted that the co- accused persons namely, Deepak Goswami and Suraj Goswami have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 30.10.2025 and 03.12.2025 passed in MCRC No.8602/2025 and 9868/2025. The applicant is in jail since 22.03.2024 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, on the ground of parity he may be granted bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that there are 07 criminal antecedents of the applicant, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused person has already been granted bail by this Court and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that there are 07 criminal antecedents of the applicant out of which in 06 cases the applicant has been acquitted, moreover, the co- accused persons namely, Deepak Goswami and Suraj Goswami have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 30.10.2025 and 03.12.2025 passed in MCRC No.8602/2025 and 9868/2025, and the applicant is in jail since 22.03.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application, on the ground of parity. 7. Let applicant, Dinesh Goswami, involved in Crime No. 289/2022, registered at Police Station – Gaurela, District – Gaurela-Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 457, 380 and 34 of the IPC, 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 4 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 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. 8. Office 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 Rajshekhar