1 CGHC010313582026 2026:CGHC:36027 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7514 of 2026 1 - Surendra Thakur S/o Vijay Thakur Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Khairi, P.S. Saja, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 2 - Sanjay Thakur S/o Late Khemu Thakur Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Khairi, P.S. Saja, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of C.G. Through Police Station Bori, District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. T.K. Jha, Sr. Advocate holding brief of Mr. Parth Kumar Jha, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13/08/2026 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 applicants, who are in judicial custody in connection with Crime No. 42/2026 registered at Police Station Bori, RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 District Durg (Chhattisgarh), for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(a) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 28.04.2026, the complainant, Suman Patel, lodged a report stating that he owns and runs a shop named “Shree Ram Hardware & Electrical” situated near the Tehsil Office, Bori, District Durg (Chhattisgarh). As he had gone out of town to attend a wedding, his employee, Anand Kushal Patel, was looking after the shop. On 27.04.2026 at about 7:30 p.m., after closing the shop, Anand left for his residence. On the following morning, i.e. 28.04.2026 at about 8:30 a.m., when he returned to the shop, he found that the lock had been broken. Upon entering the shop, he noticed that the drawer was open and, on checking, found that cash amounting to Rs. 30,000/- was missing. He immediately informed the complainant, who thereafter lodged the report. On the basis of the report, the offence was registered and investigated. Upon completion of investigation, the police filed charge-sheet before the learned Trial Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicants have two criminal antecedents; however, they have been acquitted in both the said cases. It is also submitted that the applicants have been in judicial custody since 11.05.2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Considering the period of incarceration already undergone and the aforesaid circumstances, learned counsel prays that the applicants be enlarged on regular bail. 3 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that, although the charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicants have been acquitted in both their previous criminal cases, considering the material available on record, the applicants do 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. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the fact that the applicants have been in judicial custody since 11.05.2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and the applicants have been acquitted in their previous criminal cases, coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, this Court is of the considered view that further detention of the applicants is not warranted. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicants, namely Surendra Thakur and Sanjay Thakur involved in Crime No. 42/2026 registered at Police Station Bori, District Durg (Chhattisgarh), for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(a) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject to 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 4 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 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 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 them in accordance with law. 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 for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Ruchi