1 2026:CGHC:116 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9263 of 2025 Ashik Ali @ Raja S/o Mohd. Kalim Aged About 34 Years R/o Main Market Khongapani, Police Station Jhagarakhand, District Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House O1cer, Police Station Manendragarh, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Verma, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.01.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 148/2025, registered at Police Station – Manendragarh, District Manendragarh – Chirmiri - Bharatpur, (C.G.) for the o=ence punishable under Section 304(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the complainant Janhavi Rajak lodged a report with the police on 29.08.2025, stating that on RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 26.08.2025 at about 3:30 PM, while he was travelling towards Manendragarh, he reached near Old Gurudwara, where a person riding a Bazar Puslor motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-16/CG-3302 allegedly snatched his mobile phone from his hands and @ed the spot. It was further alleged that the mobile phone was valued at Rs. 12,000/-, and on the basis of this complaint, the police registered a case and initiated investigation into the incident. Hence, the present bail application has been Bled. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has neither committed nor participated in any act constituting the alleged o=ences, and the evidence collected by the prosecution is not prima facie su1cient to hold him guilty. The applicant was not identiBed by the complainant, and no identity parade was conducted. In earlier cases, namely Crime No. 108/2025 and Crime No. 42/2025 registered at Police Station Manendragarh for o=ences under Section 304(2) of B.N.S., the applicant was granted bail by this Hon’ble Court and the learned trial Court, respectively. The prosecution has also failed to prove that any seized article belongs to the complainant, as no bill or supporting document has been produced, and the applicant was not present at the spot as alleged. He also submits that the applicant has been in jail since 30.08.2025, the charge-sheet has already been Bled, and he is the sole earning member of his family, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable amount of time. Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant has been arrested for allegedly snatching a mobile phone worth Rs. 12,000/- from the complainant Janhavi Rajak near Old Gurudwara, Manendragarh on 26.08.2025. Considering the nature of the o=ence and the prima facie material collected during investigation, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the applicant was not present at the spot, was not identiBed by the complainant, and no identity parade was conducted. It is also pertinent that in Crime No. 108/2025 registered at Police Station Manendragarh under Section 304(2) of B.N.S., the applicant was granted bail by this Court vide order dated 04.11.2025 (Bled as Annexure A-3), and in Crime No. 42/2025 registered at the same police station under Section 304(2) of B.N.S., he was granted bail by the learned trial Court vide order dated 09.10.2025 (Bled as Annexure A-4). The charge-sheet has been Bled before the competent Court, and the applicant is in jail since 30.08.2025, he is the sole earning member of his family and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Ashik Ali @ Raja, involved in Crime No. 148/2025, registered at 4 Police Station – Manendragarh, District Manendragarh – Chirmiri - Bharatpur, (C.G.) for the o=ence punishable under Section 304(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall Ble an undertaking to the e=ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates Bxed 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 Bxed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su1cient 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 Bxed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 5 (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates Bxed 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 su1cient 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. O1ce is directed to provide a certiBed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan