1 CGHC010183112026 2026:CGHC:28550 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4417 of 2026 Yasin Khan S/o- Musir Khan, Aged About 33 Years R/o- Village Ward No 52 Santoshi Nagar P.S. Tikrapara District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Hathband, District- Baloda- Bazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ...Non-Applicant(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasne, Government Advocate. 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 Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 221 of 2025 registered at Police Station – Hathband, District Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 3(5), 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNS’). BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.07.10 10:41:09 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution case, the complainant, Neerja Verma, lodged a written complaint at Police Station Hathband stating that a Hywa vehicle bearing registration No. CG-22-W-8845 had been purchased through finance from Hinduja Finance Company. Owing to default in payment of certain installments, on 08.07.2025, one Yasin Khan, son of Musir Khan, along with three other persons, allegedly claiming themselves to be recovery agents of the finance company, arrived and informed the complainant that they were taking possession of the vehicle due to non-payment of the outstanding installments. They allegedly showed certain documents relating to recovery proceedings and stated that the vehicle would be returned only after the dues were cleared. On the basis of the complaint, the matter was investigated and the present crime was registered against the applicant and other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed. He further submits that the applicant has remained in judicial custody since 02.01.2026. It is also contended that the co-accused, namely, Akib Meman, has already been enlarged on regular bail by this Court in MCRC No.2619 of 2026 vide order dated 19.03.2026 and, therefore, the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. 3 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that although the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the applicant has two criminal antecedents of the years 2022 and 2023. Hence, it is prayed that the bail application be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary as well as the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the material available on record, the fact that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the period of custody undergone by the applicant since 02.01.2026, and further taking into consideration that the co-accused, Akib Meman, has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 19.03.2026 in MCRC No. 2619 of 2026, this Court is of the opinion that the case of the present applicant stands on a similar footing. No distinguishing circumstance has been pointed out by the State to deny the benefit of parity. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to allow the present bail application. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant – Yasin Khan, involved in Crime No. 221 of 2025 registered at Police Station – Hathband, District Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offences punishable under 4 Sections 319(2), 318(4), 3(5), 111 of the BNS, be released on bail on his 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Brijmohan