1 CGHC010319662026 2026:CGHC:37397 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7742 of 2026 Sohabat Singh Bhuriya S/o Mangar Singh Aged About 34 Years R/o Village- Geta P.S. Thanda, District- Dhar, (M.P.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Sakri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. K.N. Nande, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Saurabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 20.08.2026 1. This is the Second Bail Application /led under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 101/2025 registered at Police Station – Sakri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the o7ence punishable under Sections 305(a), 331(4), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 6307/2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 29.08.2025 on merits with liberty to proceed and conclude the trial RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 expeditiously. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Priyanshu Mishra, lodged a report at Police Station Sakri, District Bilaspur, on 26.02.2025, stating that on 19.02.2025 at about 7:00 p.m., he had locked his house and left for Rewa, Madhya Pradesh, along with his family to attend his sister’s wedding. Upon returning on 26.02.2025 at about 8:00 a.m., he found that the central lock of the main door had been broken. On entering the house, he noticed that the locks of the almirahs kept in the bedroom and hall were also broken and the household articles were found scattered. Upon veri/cation, he found that cash amounting to Rs.30,000/-, one gold ring and one silver anklet, collectively valued at approximately Rs.60,000/-, had been stolen by some unknown person. Accordingly, an FIR was registered at Police Station Sakri against unknown persons for the o7ences punishable under Sections 331(4), 305A and 3(5) of the BNSS. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that in connection with Crime No.366/2024 registered at Police Station Pandri, District Raipur, for o7ences under the aforesaid provisions, the accused persons, namely, Pradeep Soni, Anil Bhuriya and the present appellant, Sohbat Singh Bhuriya, were taken into custody on 02.03.2025. During their memorandum statements, the accused persons allegedly disclosed their involvement in the commission of the theft at Asma City, Bilaspur. Upon completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was /led against the accused persons before the learned Trial Court. 3 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merit with a direction to conclude the trial expeditiously. He further submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, and that no direct or cogent material has been collected by the prosecution connecting him with the alleged o7ence. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been /led and there is no incriminating material on record suCcient to establish the applicant’s involvement in the o7ences punishable under Sections 305A, 331(4) and 3(5) of the BNSS. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 17.03.2025 and has undergone incarceration for about one year and /ve months. It is also submitted that the witnesses to the memorandum and seizure have turned hostile, thereby weakening the prosecution case against the applicant. He also submits that so far as the status of the trial is concerned, out of 07 prosecution witnesses, only 01 prosecution witnesses has been examined in the case. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is involved in the commission of the alleged house-breaking and theft and that there is suCcient prima facie material on record connecting him with the o7ence. It is submitted that during investigation, the applicant, along with the co-accused, was taken into custody in connection with another similar o7ence, and pursuant to their memorandum statements, their involvement in the present o7ence was disclosed. 4 He further submits that the o7ences alleged are serious in nature and that the applicant has been speci/cally implicated on the basis of the material collected during investigation. He further submits that the applicant has 03 more previous criminal antecedents which is pending. It is also submitted that merely because some witnesses have turned hostile or the trial is proceeding slowly, the applicant cannot claim bail as a matter of right. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the o7ence, the manner of commission and the material available on record, the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that this is the second bail application and the earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits with a direction to conclude the trial expeditiously and so far as the status of the trial is concerned, out of 07 prosecution witnesses, only one prosecution witnesses has been examined till date, further the fact that though the applicant has 03 more criminal antecedents which is pending, but also considering that the applicant is in jail since 17.03.2025, this Court /nds that the applicant has undergone a substantial period of incarceration of about one year and /ve months and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, and the charge-sheet has already been /led before the competent Court. Without expressing any 5 opinion on the merits of the case, and keeping in view the period of incarceration already undergone, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Sohabat Singh Bhuriya, involved in Crime No. 101/2025 registered at Police Station – Sakri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the o7ence punishable under Sections 305(a), 331(4), 3(5) of the Bharatiya 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 /le an undertaking to the e7ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates /xed 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 /xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of her absence, without suCcient 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, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued 6 and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date /xed 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 /xed 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 suCcient 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. 9. OCce is directed to send a certi/ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan