1 2026:CGHC:7652 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 415 of 2026 • Md. Sabir Alias Batali S/o Late Muneer Aged About 36 Years R/o Faruki Gali, Palace Road, Chandani Chauk, Raigarh, Tah And P.S. Dist. Raigarh C.G. --- Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh C.G. --- Respondent MCRC No. 1033 of 2026 • Saddam Malik S/o Kutubuddin Malik Aged About 36 Years Madhuban Para, Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh C.G. ---Applicant Versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh, District Raigarh C.G. --- Respondent MCRC No. 706 of 2026 • Ikram Khan S/o Late Suleman Khan, Aged About 28 Years R/o Chandani Chauk, Turkapara, Raigarh, P.S. City Kotwali, District- Raigarh (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh District- Raigarh (C.G.) --- Respondent VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.02.12 19:00:01 +0530 2 (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicants : Mr. Manosj Kumar Sinha and Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer For Objector Mr. Hari Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 11.02.2026 1. Since all the applications are arising out of the same crime number and they are being heard decided by this common order. 2. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.491/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, Raigarh District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305, 317(2), 317(5), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 3. As per the leading case, the prosecution story, is that on 24.09.2025, the complainant Smt. Arju Bano Malik lodged written report to the police station city on 28.08.2025 at 1.30 Kotwali Raigarh alleging that hours, she went to her maternal house due to quarrel in family. On 21.09.2025 in evening at about 5.00PM, she return to her house and found that the lock of the house was changed and another lock was there, when she entered into her house after breaking the lock, she found that her household articles, gold ornaments and others stolen by unknown persons. It is alleged that 4 piece gold chain(Har) weighing about 1.75 gm, gold ring 3 pieces weight 30 gm, gold ear set, silver payal 4 pieces, mobile phone, total amount of Rs.2,00,000/-has been stolen by unknown persons. Thereafter, FIR 3 has been registered against the present applicants. Hence, this bail application. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He also submits that no gold ornaments, silver articles, cash, mobile phone or any alleged stolen property have been seized from the applicants. He also submits that co-accused namely Sameer Khan has already been granted bail by learned trial Court in bail application No.925 of 2025 vide order dated 08.10.2025. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicants are in jail since 08.10.2025 and 29.08.2025 respectively and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the Objector would opposes the bail application and submits that the stolen ornaments/articles have been seized from the possession of the applicants. and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case and there are criminal antecedents registered against the present applicants and all are mentioned in the bail applications at paragraph 4(a), it appears that applicants are habitual offender, therefore they are not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that charge-sheet has been filed against the applicants in the present case, applicants are in jail since 08.10.2025 and 4 29.08.2025 respectively and co-accused namely Sameer Khan has already been granted bail by learned trial Court in bail application No.925 of 2025 vide order dated 08.10.2025, conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, considering the period of detention of the applicants, I am inclined to allow this bail applications. 8. Let applicants- Md. Sabir alias Batali, Saddam Khan and Ikram Khan involved in Crime No. 491/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, Raigarh District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305, 317(2), 317(5), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each 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, 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 5 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. 9. 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 vaishali