1 CGHC010275622026 2026:CGHC:32053 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6737 of 2026 Sumitra Ratre W/o Manish Gupta Aged About 28 Years R/o Bendarkona, Thana Civil Line Rampur, District - Korba, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Civil Line Rampur, District - Korba, C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 27.07.2026 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. 215/2026 registered at Police Station Civil Line, Rampur, District Korba (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A), 317(5) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 15.03.2026, the complainant, Triveni Khare, lodged a report stating that during the RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 intervening night of 11/12.03.2026, an unknown person had committed theft of her gold ornaments and a bag from her house, causing a loss of approximately ₹15,000/-. On the basis of the said report, an FIR was registered against unknown persons and investigation was undertaken. During the course of investigation, the police arrested the principal accused, Purnima Gupta, and on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused, the present applicant was also implicated in the alleged offence and subsequently arrested. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no connection whatsoever with the alleged offence. It is submitted that the applicant has been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused and there is no independent incriminating material available on record connecting her with the alleged crime. He further submits that no stolen article has been recovered or seized from the possession of the applicant. He further submits that similarly situated two co-accused persons, namely, Purnima Gupta and Adesh Bhaskar have already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court vide orders dated 15.06.2026 and 23.07.2026 in MCRC Nos. 3042/2026 and 6635/2026 respectively. It is also submitted that though the applicant has three previous criminal antecedents, similarly situated co-accused persons having criminal antecedents have already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court. He further submits that the applicant is a 28-year-old woman, engaged in labour work for her livelihood and 3 she is in jail since 01.05.2026, the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the absence of any recovery from the applicant, her implication solely on the basis of the memorandum of a co-accused, her status as a woman, and the principle of parity, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused. 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, the fact that though the allegation against the present applicant is that she was involved in the commission of theft and was implicated on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused during investigation, but it is also to be noted that the two co-accused persons, namely, Purnima Gupta and Adesh Bhaskar have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 15.06.2026 and 23.07.2026 in MCRC Nos. 3042/2026 and 6635/2026 respectively, and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused person, further considering the fact that though the applicant has three previous criminal antecedents, similarly situated co-accused 4 persons having criminal antecedents have already been granted bail by this Court, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, and he is jail since 01.05.2026, the conclusion of the trial will take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Sumitra Ratre, involved in Crime No. 215/2026 registered at Police Station Civil Line, Rampur, District Korba (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A), 317(5) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 she 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya 5 Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, 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 her 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 Rahul Dewangan