1 CGHC010316322026 2026:CGHC:36352 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7561 of 2026 1 - Gajanand Yadav S/o Ramlal Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Raksa, P.S. And Tehsil- Dhamdha, District- Durg, (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Amanaka, District- Raipur, (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Vedant Bhelonde, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 14.08.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), seeking grant of regular bail to the applicant, who is in judicial custody in connection with Crime No. 28/2026 registered at Police Station Amanaka, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), for the offences punishable RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 under Sections 303(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, the complainant parked his brother’s motorcycle bearing Registration No. CG-04-PX-6738 at the parking lot of Ashok Leyland City Wheel Showroom, Tatibandh, on 02.12.2025 and, upon returning, found it missing. Accordingly, an FIR was registered against an unknown person for the offence punishable under Section 303(2) of the BNS. During investigation, the said motorcycle was recovered by Police Station Supela, District Durg, along with six other stolen motorcycles. The applicant, along with other co-accused persons, was arrested on 03.06.2026. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that no seizure has been made from the applicant and he has been implicated merely on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused. It is further submitted that the co-accused in the present case has already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 06.08.2026 passed in MCRC Nos. 7142/2026 and 7143/2026; therefore, the applicant is entitled to bail on the ground of parity. It is also submitted that the applicant has been in custody since 03.06.2026, the investigation has been completed and the charge- sheet has already been filed and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may kindly be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that although the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant has four criminal antecedents. Considering the nature and gravity of the alleged 3 offences and the material available on record, the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, it is prayed that the bail application be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, and the fact that the co-accused in the same crime has already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 06.08.2026 passed in MCRC Nos. 7142/2026 and 7143/2026, the applicant deserves to be extended the benefit of parity. Further, considering the period of custody undergone by the applicant since 03.06.2026 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the Applicant – Gajanand Yadav involved in Crime No. 28/2026 registered at Police Station Amanaka, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya 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 4 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 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. 5 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously from the receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 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 Ruchi