1 / 3 2026:CGHC:24514 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5107 of 2026 • Roshan Bareth Son Of Late Santosh Bareth, Aged About 18 Years R/o- Village Hardi (Mahamaya), P.S. Balouda District- Janjgir- Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station Balouda, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rawindra Prakash Yadaw, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 17/06/2026 1. Applicant has filed this second bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 111/2026 registered at Police Station – Balouda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A), 112(1), 3(5) of B.N.S. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that on 10.03.2026 complainant lodged an oral report in the concerned police station stating therein that on 05.03.2026 at about 10:00 am he went to his native place Hardi Mahamaya after locking up the doors of the house. When he returned back on 10.03.2026 at about 10:00 am, he found the lock of the house broken and upon entering the house, he found household articles lying around, here and there. Upon examining, he also revealed that utensils of the house have been theft worth Rs. 10,000. PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA Date: 2026.06.19 16:51:22 +0530 2 / 3 Based on the report, crime number 111/2026 is registered against unknown person. On suspicion, one Ganesh Kenwat was taken into custody and interrogated in which he made statement that he had committed theft along with present applicant at two places, based on which applicant was arrested on 10.03.2026. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been made accused only on the basis of memorandum statement of another co-accused, he has not committed any offence, he has been falsely implicated in the crime. He submits that applicant has been arrested on 10.03.2026 in Crime No. 111/2026 (present crime) and Crime No. 92/2026 and no other crime is registered against applicant. In the application he has pleaded pendency of crime number 110/2026 also only because it is forming part of the impugned order. He also contended that through there is seizure of utensils shown from possession of applicant, however, it is regular utensils used in the house and therefore it cannot be said that the said utensils seized from possession of applicant to be of complainant. Applicant is in jail since 12.03.2026, hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and would submit that based on the memorandum statement of co-accused applicant was arrested. He however submits that he has sought instructions from the concerned SHO with regard to criminal antecedents of applicant and the arrest of applicant in the crimes registered against him, he contended that apart from the present crime, subject matter of this application, one another crime bearing Crime No. 92/2026 is also registered against applicant in the same police station and he has been arrested in both the crimes on the same date. He also pointed out that only two crimes are registered against applicant. 3 / 3 5. Upon putting query as to whether utensils recovered from possession of applicant have been put to identification, he submitted that no such proceeding is available in the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for the parties, tender age of applicant to be 18 years, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this bail application. 7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in like sum to the satisfaction of the Court 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 his counsel. In case of his 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, 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) pwn JUDGE