1 CGHC010268422026 2026:CGHC:37200 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6250 of 2026 1 - Deepak @ Shivshankar Sinha S/o Manglu Ram Sinha Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Dhamdha P.S. And Tehsil Dhamdha District- Durg (C.G.) 2 - Tikeshwar Gajendra S/o Bishal Mehar Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Dhamdha P.S. And Tehsil Dhamdha District- Durg (C.G.) 3 - Dinesh Dhivar S/o Shurit Dhivar Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Dhamdha P.S. And Tehsil Dhamdha District- Durg (C.G.) 4 - Dhananjay Sinha S/o Neel Kanth Jaiswal Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Dhamdha P.S. And Tehsil Dhamdha District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bagbahara, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Shingh, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.08.2026 VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.19 17:43:42 +0530 2 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 0120/2026 registered at Police Station - Bagbahara, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(4), 312, 61 & 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief, is that the owner of Shree Ganesh Jewellers lodged a complaint stating that on 24.06.2026, at about 7:00 to 7:30 p.m., his son informed him over the phone that he, along with his friend Shreyansh Jain, had gone for a ride on a scooter towards Jhalap Road. It is alleged that while they were sitting in a field situated behind Mahobiya Traders, three persons wearing masks and riding a motorcycle suddenly approached them and, by showing a knife, forcibly snatched a gold chain weighing/valueing approximately Rs.2,38,000/-, which had been given to the complainant’s son by him, from his neck. It is further alleged that the said persons also snatched the bracelet worn by Shreyansh Jain and thereafter fled towards Bagbahara. Upon receiving the information, the complainant immediately reached the spot and made inquiries from the persons present nearby regarding the alleged chain snatchers, but they could not be traced. On the basis of the said allegations, the present case was registered against the accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case, as they have no involvement in the alleged crime and their names do not find place in the FIR. It is submitted that the applicants belong to poor 3 families and are the sole bread-earners of their respective families, and their continued incarceration is causing serious financial hardship to their family members. Learned counsel further submits that the main accused, Shreyansh Jain, who is alleged to be the mastermind behind the incident, has already been granted bail by the Court below, and therefore, the applicants are also entitled to the benefit of parity. It is further submitted that the applicants have been in judicial custody since 27.06.2026 and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. The applicants are tile workers and were working at the house of Shreyansh Jain and have been implicated merely on the basis of suspicion; no stolen property or any other incriminating article has been seized from their possession. Learned counsel also submits that the prosecution version itself is doubtful, as the son of the jeweller, Shubh Soni, had allegedly incurred betting-related debt and, in order to conceal the sale of his gold chain from his father, may have concocted a false story of chain snatching. The applicants are ready and willing to furnish adequate surety and to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court. Accordingly, learned counsel prays that the applicants may kindly be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge- sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicants, the fact that they have no criminal antecedents, and further considering that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, that one of the co-accused has already been granted bail by the Trial Court, that the applicants have been in judicial custody since 27.06.2026, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicants. 7. Let the Applicants - Deepak @ Shivshankar Sinha, Tikeshwar Gajendra, Dinesh Dhivar & Dhananjay Sinha, involved in Crime No. 0120/2026 registered at Police Station - Bagbahara, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(4), 312, 61 & 3(5) of the BNS, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya 5 Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav