1 CGHC010162642026 2026:CGHC:29970 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4029 of 2026 1 - Gurulal Singh @ Vikky S/o Resham Singh Aged About 20 Years R/o Ward No. 02, Virendranagar Saraipali, P.S. And Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Deepak Biro S/o Sudama Biro Aged About 21 Years R/o Ward No. 02, Virendranagar Saraipali, P.S. And Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Pithora, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 15.07.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 71/2026 registered at Police Station- Pithora, District Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 309(4) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 25 & 27 of the RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the basis of a report lodged by the complainant, it was alleged that on the intervening night of 08.03.2026 and 09.03.2026, at about 2:00 A.M., while the complainant was on duty at HP Teka Fuels Petrol Pump, three unknown persons arrived at the petrol pump and, by threatening him with a knife, robbed him of cash amounting to Rs. 36,500/- and one mobile phone, and thereafter fled from the spot. On the basis of the said report, the police registered an FIR for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as well as Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act against unknown persons. During the course of investigation, the present applicants were implicated and subsequently arrested on the basis of memorandum statements and other material collected by the investigating agency in connection with the aforesaid crime. The applicants are presently in judicial custody. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the FIR was initially registered against unknown persons and the names of the present applicants do not find place in the FIR. He further submits that the applicants have been implicated merely on the basis of suspicion and memorandum statements recorded during investigation, without there being any credible or independent material connecting them with the alleged 3 offence. It is argued that no recovery of the looted cash, mobile phone, weapon, or any other incriminating article has been effected from the possession of the applicants and that the prosecution has failed to collect sufficient evidence to establish their involvement in the alleged incident. He also submits that the prosecution story is based on conjectures and assumptions and that the applicants have been roped in on the basis of a concocted and fabricated case. It is further submitted that the applicants have one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail, granted by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 08.07.2026. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicants are in jail since 27.03.2026 & 28.03.2026 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that the charge- sheet has already been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that the allegations against the applicants are grave and serious in nature, involving the commission of a robbery during the night hours by threatening the complainant with a deadly weapon. It is contended that during the course of investigation, sufficient material has been collected by the investigating agency indicating the involvement of the applicants in the commission of the offence and that their implication is not based merely on suspicion. She further submits that the applicants were 4 identified and apprehended pursuant to the investigation carried out by the police, and the evidence collected, including memorandum statements and other incriminating circumstances, prima facie connects them with the crime. She further submits that the applicants have one more previous criminal antecedent of the similar nature. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations and the role attributed to the applicants, it is not a fit case for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the nature of allegations and the material available on record, and the fact that though the applicants are alleged to be involved in the commission of a robbery, but the implication of the applicants is primarily based on the memorandum statements of co-accused persons. Further, considering the fact that the charge- sheet has been filed, the applicants have one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail, granted by this Court vide order dated 08.07.2026, and applicants are in jail since 27.03.2026 & 28.03.2026, and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the period of incarceration already undergone by the applicants, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the Applicants – Gurulal Singh @ Vikky and Deepak Biro 5 involved in Crime No. 71/2026 registered at Police Station- Pithora, District Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 309(4) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 6 (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan