1 CGHC010235552026 2026:CGHC:27956 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5996 of 2026 Saurabh Chandravanshi S/o Dilip Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Gadakusmi, P.S. Gidhpuri, Distt. Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Gidhpuri, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Yogesh Kumar Chandra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 55/2026 registered at Police Station- Gidhpuri, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4) and 305 of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that the complainant, Surendra Kumar Bandhe, lodged a written report at Police Station Gidhpuri stating that on 14.04.2026, at about 3:00 P.M., after locking the KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Government Fair Price Shop, he returned to his house. On 15.04.2026, at about 2:30 A.M., one Birjhu Dahariya came to his house and informed him that at about 2:10 A.M., the present applicant, Saurabh Chandravanshi, had broken open the lock of the Government Fair Price Shop, entered inside and committed theft of rice bags kept therein. Thereafter, the complainant, along with Birjhu Dahariya, reached the Fair Price Shop where the village Kotwar Dharmendra Das Manikpuri, Rameshwar Ghritlahare and Nitesh Kumar Bandhe were already present and had apprehended the applicant. Upon verification of the stock, it was found that three bags of rice valued at approximately ₹6,600/- were missing, which, according to the prosecution, had been stolen and concealed by the applicant. During the course of investigation, the applicant allegedly confessed to the commission of the offence in his memorandum statement recorded in the presence of witnesses and was accordingly arrested on 15.04.2026. Thus, Crime No. 55/2026 was registered against the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4) and 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 15.04.2026, has no criminal antecedents, and 3 the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. It is, therefore, prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the present applicant was apprehended immediately after the incident by the villagers near the Government Fair Price Shop and during the course of investigation, he allegedly admitted his involvement in the commission of the offence in his memorandum statement. It is further submitted that the theft was committed by breaking open the lock of a Government Fair Price Shop and three bags of rice meant for public distribution, valued at approximately ₹6,600/-, were found to be missing. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations and the material collected during the course of investigation, it is submitted that no case for grant of bail is made out and therefore, the present bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 15.04.2026 and the fact that in the present case, charge- sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and no further interrogation is required and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 4 8. Let the applicant –Saurabh Chandravanshi, involved in Crime No. 55/2026 registered at Police Station- Gidhpuri, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4) and 305 of BNS, 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 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. 5 (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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dirurt fo forthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal