1 CGHC010270372026 2026:CGHC:31212 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6570 of 2026 Yogesh Yadav @ Golu Son of Devanand Yadav, Aged About 26 Years Resident of Ward No. 2, South Jhagadakhand, Nai Ledari, Police Station Jhagarakhand, District- Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Jhagarakhand, District- Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ramsajiwan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State. : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22.07.2026 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. 65/2026 registered at Police Station - Jhagarakhand, District – Manendragarh- Chirmiri- Bharatpur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4) and Section 305(A) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the brief facts of the prosecution case, the complainant, namely Ramnihor, lodged an oral complaint at the concerned Police Station stating that, during the intervening night of 14.06.2026 and 15.06.2026, ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.23 11:32:11 +0530 2 at about 2:30 A.M., the Security Guard, Gendlal Kenwat, informed him that the present applicant had broken the window of the office and stolen the copper wire of the air conditioner (A.C.) as well as a mercury light installed in the office, causing a total loss of approximately Rs. 8,000/-. On the basis of the said complaint, the aforesaid crime was registered against the present applicant. Upon completion of the investigation, the police filed the charge sheet before the concerned Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the police have prepared a false seizure memo with a view to falsely implicate the applicant in the present case, and that the applicant is hopeful of being acquitted of the charges levelled against him during the course of the trial. He further submits that the applicant has only 01 criminal antecedent of a similar nature, which is presently pending trial. The explanation regarding the said criminal antecedent has already been furnished in Paragraph D of the present bail application. He further submits that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 16.06.2026, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, he prays that the applicant be enlarged on 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 already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and further considering the fact that the applicant has only 01 criminal antecedent of a similar nature, which is presently pending trial, and that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, as 3 well as the fact that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 16.06.2026 and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in the present case. 7. Let the Applicant – Yogesh Yadav @ Golu, involved in Crime No. 65/2026 registered at Police Station - Jhagarakhand, District – Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4) and Section 305(A) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on 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 his 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 4 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek