1 2026:CGHC:4529 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 668 of 2026 1. Rahul Kumar S/o Upendralal Aged About 26 Years Caste- Shrivastava, R/o Village- Dobhi, Police Station- Dobhi, District- Gaya (Bihar) ... Applicant (in Jail) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- City Kotwali, District Raigarh C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dhirendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate For Non-applicant : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board 27.01.2026 1. This is second application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to applicant. First application bearing MCrC No.5721/2025 was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 16.9.2025 with liberty to repeat the prayer after examination of material witnesses. 2. The applicant is in custody since 20.9.2023 in connection with Crime No.696/2023 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh (CG) for commission of offence punishable under SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Digitally signed by SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Date: 2026.01.28 17:04:55 +0530 2 Sections 323, 506, 342, 450, 395, 397, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25, 27 of Arms Act. 3. Case of prosecution in brief is that on 19.09.2023, some persons entered into the Axis Bank, Raigarh, have committed robbery and ran away. Incident was reported to the concerned police station and it was circulated to the entire border areas of the State. When applicant was travelling in the truck, his truck was intercepted by police and on suspicion, he was taken to police station and thereafter, he was arrested. His memorandum statement was also recorded. 4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. He submits that applicant was one of the occupants of truck which was intercepted by police, he was taken to police station and thereafter it is shown that Rs.5,40,35,177/- has allegedly been seized from the applicant, which he was carrying in truck. He contended that there is no independent witness to seizure of aforementioned amount by the applicant from the post. Sunil Kumar and Jaiprakash Singh (employer of truck) are made seizure witnesses in police station. Another seizure witness namely Pankaj Singh has not supported the case of prosecution though he is also made seizure witness in the police station. He submits that driver of truck namely Upendra alias Upendra 3 Singh has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 5.12.2024 in M.Cr.C. No.8528/2024. Case of present applicant and co- accused Upendra Singh, who has been enlarged on bail, is on similar footing. Applicant is in custody since 20.9.2023, conclusion of trial may take time, hence, applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes submissions of learned counsel for applicant and submits that applicant has been arrested in connection with serious offence of dacoity in Axis Bank at Raigarh. During course of investigation, based on information, truck in question was intercepted and amount of Rs.5,40,35,177/- from applicant, which was being transported in truck. Upon asking, she submits that seizure witnesses were called in the police station and they were made seizure witnesses. She also does not dispute that Upendra alias Upendra Singh, driver of truck in question, has been enlarged on regular bail. She, however, submits that there are two criminal antecedents of applicant in State of Bihar, one bearing Crime No.491/2024 under Section 30 of the Excise Act and another for commission of offence under Section 414 of IPC. 6. I have heard learned counsel for parties. 7. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations; submission of learned counsel for 4 respective parties, the fact that co-accused Upendra alias Upendra Singh, driver of truck, from whose truck alleged money is recovered; out of total 72 listed witnesses only 22 witnesses are examined till July, 2025 and pre-trial detention period of applicant, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to grant regular bail to applicant. Accordingly, this second bail application is allowed and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to satisfaction of trial Court concerned on the conditions that; (a) 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. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, 5 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. (d) 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/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge roshan/-