1 2026:CGHC:22623 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4491 of 2026 Kamlesh Verma S/o Late Ashok Verma Aged About 31 Years R/o Village - Badgaon, P. S. - Mandir Hasod, Raipur, District - (Revenue And Civil) - Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - Khamhardih, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Yogesh Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.05.2026 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. 42/2025 registered at Police Station – Khamhardih, District – Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 310(2), 331(5), 351(3), 123, 61(2), 168, 238 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a complaint at Police Station Khamhardih, Raipur (C.G.), alleging that on the date of ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.05.14 11:04:44 +0530 2 the incident, some unknown persons entered his house and looted cash amounting to Rs. 66,25,000/-, three gold chains, and three old mobile phones, along with other cash and valuables worth Rs. 66,00,000/-, with the help of a pistol, and thereafter fled from the place of the incident. Based upon the said complaint, an offence was registered against the unknown persons. During the course of investigation, the police arrested the applicant on the basis of the memorandum statements of the co- accused persons. After completion of the investigation, the police submitted the charge sheet before the Trial Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is also contended that another co-accused, namely Shahid Taj, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 24.04.2026 passed in MCRC No. 3512 of 2026, and another co-accused, namely Manuraj Mourya, has also been granted bail by this Court in his third bail application vide order dated 07.05.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4238 of 2026. Learned counsel further submits that, so far as the status of the trial is concerned, only 09 out of 21 prosecution witnesses have been examined till date. Therefore, it is argued that the present applicant is also entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 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, particularly that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the co- 3 accused Shahid Taj has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 24.04.2026 passed in MCRC No. 3512 of 2026 and another co-accused, namely Manuraj Mourya, has also been granted bail by this Court in his third bail application vide order dated 07.05.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4238 of 2026, as well as the fact that only 09 out of 21 prosecution witnesses have been examined till date, this Court further notes that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the applicant has been in custody since 14.02.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Bail of the Applicant – Kamlesh Verma, involved in Crime No. 42/2025 registered at Police Station – Khamhardih, District – Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 310(2), 331(5), 351(3), 123, 61(2), 168, 238 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on 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 4 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 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. 8. 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 Abhishek