1 CGHC010222102026 2026:CGHC:30756 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5307 of 2026 Ashiya Shikari Alias Unsiya Pardi W/o Mr. Anju Shikari Aged About 40 Years R/o Damoh (Wrongly Mentioned As Damoi), Police Station- Patharia, District- Damoh Wrongly Mentioned As Damod)- Madhya Pradesh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station In Charge Police Station- Pendra, District - Gaurela- Pendra- Marwahi, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Yashkaran Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20.07.2026 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 87/2026, registered at Police Station – Pendra, District - Gaurela- Pendra - Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2),112(2) & 3(5) of the BNS. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.21 11:18:43 +0530 2 2. According to the prosecution, on 18.03.2026, the complainant, who is engaged in the business of sale and purchase of ornaments, had opened his jewellery shop for the day's business. At about the relevant time, an unidentified woman entered the shop on the pretext of purchasing jewellery and engaged the complainant in conversation by making enquiries about various ornaments. While the complainant was attending to her, two unidentified persons allegedly entered the shop from the rear side and, taking advantage of the distraction created by the woman, clandestinely removed jewellery articles along with 5,000 in cash ₹ from the shop. After committing the theft, all the accused persons fled from the spot. On discovering the theft, the complainant lodged a report at the concerned Police Station, on the basis of which an FIR was registered against unknown persons for the appropriate offences. During the course of investigation, the police identified and apprehended the accused persons, recovered part of the stolen property, and after completion of the investigation, filed the charge-sheet before the competent Court. 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 punishable under Sections 303(2), 112(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It is contended that, as per the prosecution case itself, the complainant did not see the persons who allegedly committed the theft, and therefore there is no direct evidence connecting the applicant with the commission of the alleged offence. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has been implicated merely on the allegation that she was present in 3 the jewellery shop and was conversing with the complainant at the relevant time while making enquiries regarding purchase of jewellery. It is submitted that the applicant had visited the shop only because her relatives had assured her that they would gift her jewellery of her choice, and she was genuinely enquiring about the ornaments, having no knowledge whatsoever of the alleged theft or the persons who allegedly committed it. It is further argued that the prosecution case is based merely on suspicion and conjectures, and no cogent or reliable material has been collected during the investigation to establish the applicant's involvement in the alleged offence. Learned counsel submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed and, therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. It is also submitted that the applicant is a 40-year-old woman, belongs to a rural background, is a poor person, and is the sole breadwinner of her family. Her children and other family members are entirely dependent upon her, and her continued incarceration has caused severe financial hardship to the family. Learned counsel further contends that the false implication of the applicant has seriously jeopardized her reputation and future prospects. It is submitted that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude and, therefore, continued detention of the applicant would amount to pre-trial punishment. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, there is no likelihood of her absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, and she undertakes to cooperate with the trial, abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court, and furnish adequate bail bonds and sureties to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on 4 regular bail. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the present applicant, the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 19.03.2026, coupled with the fact that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let applicant, Ashiya Shikari Alias Unsiya Pardi, involved in Crime No. 87/2026, registered at Police Station – Pendra, District - Gaurela- Pendra - Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2),112(2) & 3(5) of the BNS, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 5 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. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav