1 2026:CGHC:3673 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10353 of 2025 Pappu Sahu @ Abdulla S/o Late Shri Hiralal Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o New Lakshmi Nagar, Near Madarasa Mowa, P.S. Pandri, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Pandri, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.01.2026 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. 109/2025, registered at Police Station - Pandri District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(4) & 3(5) of the BNS 2023. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.22 12:14:16 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that on 21.05.2025 the complainant, Mithlesh Ram, made a complaint stating that on 17.05.2025 at about 02:00am, three persons namely Abdulla, Chiku & Aditya, knocked on the door in the name of charging the mobile phone and forced him to the open the door, and when he opened the door, then Aditya by showing a knife threatened his friend namely Praddham Mahara, to give his watch, two silver rings, and from the complainant took 1 ring, one mobile phone (Vivo company), Rs. 5000 cash and committed a robbery, and further threatened to kill if they informed to anyone. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the applicant and the complainant are known to each other, and due to some personal disagreement, the complainant has falsely implicated him. There has been a substantial and unexplained delay in lodging the FIR. The seizure allegedly made by the police is false and fabricated, as there is no identification linking the seized articles to the complainant. The applicant was denied bail by the trial court solely on the ground of previous criminal antecedents, which cannot sustain in law, as no prima facie case is made out against him. There is no legally admissible evidence against the applicant to substantiate the offence with which he is charged. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 24.05.2025, therefore, prays for the grant of 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 filed in the present case, and the applicant has 11 3 criminal antecedents, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 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, submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the period of detention of the applicant since 24/05/2025, charge sheet has been filed and also considering the fact that trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Pappu Sahu @ Abdulla, involved in Crime No. 109/2025, registered at Police Station - Pandri District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(4) & 3(5) of the BNS 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 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 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, 4 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