1 CGHC010163552026 2026:CGHC:28461 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3865 of 2026 Vinay Kumar Shah S/o Vijay Shan Aged About 22 Years R/o Sanjay Nagar Near Animal Hospital, Thana And Tehsil Saraypali,- District- Mahasamund C.G. --- Applicant(s) versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Saraypali Distt. Mahasamund C.G. --- Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 321/2025 registered at Police Station AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Saraypali Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 309(6), 351(2) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant alleged that the applicant, along with the co-accused, wrongfully restrained him and his friend, assaulted him, and robbed him of his Redmi Note 10S mobile phone and Rs.4,000 in cash. Subsequently, upon learning that the stolen mobile phone was in the possession of a co- accused, the complainant lodged the FIR, whereupon the applicant was arrested and, after completion of investigation, the charge- sheet was filed. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that bail application of the identically situated co-accused, namely, Rohan Yadav has already been allowed by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2026 in MCRC No.1662 of 2026. The applicant is in jail since 13.03.2026, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the applicant allegedly in collusion with the co-accused, wrongfully restrained and assaulted the complainant and robbed him of his mobile phone and Rs.4,000 in cash, but could not dispute the fact that identically situated co- 3 accused, Rohan Yadav has already been granted bail by this Court. 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 13.03.2026, the fact that though the applicant allegedly in collusion with the co-accused, wrongfully restrained and assaulted the complainant and robbed him of his mobile phone and Rs.4,000 in cash, but considering the fact that co-accused, namely, Rohan Yadav has already been allowed by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2026 in MCRC No.1662 of 2026 and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the said co-accused, further the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Vinay Kumar Shah, involved in Crime No. 321/2025 registered at Police Station Saraypali Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 309(6), 351(2) 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 4 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. (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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil