1 / 5 CGHC010164782026 2026:CGHC:27757 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3808 of 2026 Sonu Rajwade S/o Raghu @ Raghunandan Rajwade Aged About 23 Years Caste Rajwad R/o Village Bhuneshwarpur (Chikhlapara) P.S. Srinagar, Dist. Surajpur Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station/ Thana - Pratappur, Dist. Surajpur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Anmol Gupta, Advocate For State : Ms. Monika Singh Thakur, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice) Order on Board 06/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Shuraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 04/12/2024 in connection with Crime No. 134/2024, registered at Police Station Pratappur, District Surajpur, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 457, 380 read with Section 34 of IPC. ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2026.07.07 11:02:55 +0530 2 / 5 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 20.04.2024, complainant Lakshmi Prasad Gupta lodged a written report stating that his son Om Prakash Gupta had gone to his in-laws' house on 18.04.2024, leaving his house locked. During the intervening night of 19/20.04.2024, an unknown person trespassed into the house by breaking the roof sheet and rear door, broke open the lock of an iron trunk and committed theft of gold and silver ornaments and cash. On the same night, the accused also broke into the nearby grocery shop of Rajkumar Gupta and stole cash, batteries, LED bulbs and a mobile phone. The total value of the stolen property was about ₹40,000. On the basis of the report, an FIR was registered under Sections 457 and 380 IPC against an unknown person. During investigation, the spot map was prepared, witnesses were examined, seizure proceedings were conducted and, on collecting sufficient evidence against the accused, charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court for trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would further submit that the applicant has not been named in the FIR and there is no direct or independent evidence connecting him with the alleged offence. He would further submit that the presence of the applicant is stated to be based merely on the memorandum statement, which by itself is not substantive evidence. It is further submitted that no recovery has been effected from the conscious and exclusive possession of the applicant and mere presence at the spot does not establish possession or involvement in the alleged offence. It is also argued that the prosecution 3 / 5 has failed to establish the proper chain of custody of the seized articles, including their safe custody, sealing and forwarding to the concerned laboratory. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is in judicial custody since 04.12.2024, the investigation/trial is likely to take considerable time, and continued incarceration would cause undue hardship to him and his dependent family members. It is also contended that the alleged offence is triable by a Magistrate and it may take some more time to conclude the trial, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail, as there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and would submit that there are previous antecedents to the credit of the present applicant wherein two cases he has been granted bail and one case is pending. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 6. Upon perusal of the record, it is noticed that out of 14 prosecution witnesses, 8 witnesses have already been examined. Thus, a substantial part of the prosecution evidence has already been recorded, thereby considerably reducing the possibility of the applicant influencing the material witnesses. The applicant has remained in judicial custody since 04.12.2024 and the trial is still likely to consume some more time. In the facts and circumstances of the case, continued incarceration of the applicant would not serve any useful purpose. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and having regard to the nature of allegations, the period of custody undergone, the progress of the trial and 4 / 5 the settled principles governing grant of bail, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let applicant Sonu Rajwade, involved in Crime No.134/2024, under Sections 457, 380 read with Section 34 of IPC, police station Pratappur, District Surajpur, C.G., be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in like amount 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 their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial Court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. (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, 2023 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 5 / 5 against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. (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 2023. 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 them in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. SD/- SD/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice ashu