1 2026:CGHC:129 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9045 of 2025 Tarun Suryavanshi S/o Purandas Aged About 22 Years Resident of Bhathapara, Janjgir, Police Station Janjgir, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House O0cer, Police Station Janjgir, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vivek Singhal, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, 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. 907/2025, registered at Police Station – Janjgir, District Janjgir – Champa, (C.G.) for the o=ence punishable under Section 331(4)(5), 305(A), 310(4), 312, 296, 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 of Arms Act. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the complainant, namely Rahul Agrawal, lodged a complaint at Police Station Janjgir stating ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.01.05 16:40:04 +0530 2 that he is the owner of a shop known as “Shyam Supar Market” and that his residential house is situated adjacent to the said shop. It is alleged that on 04.10.2025 at about 8:30 p.m., after closing his shop, the complainant returned to his house, took dinner, and went to sleep. At about 2:00 a.m., he allegedly heard noise suggesting that some persons were attempting to break open the shutter of his shop, whereupon the complainant and his father raised alarm. Upon this, the accused persons allegedly attempted to Bee from the spot; however, the patrolling police party apprehended them, and consequently, the crime in question was registered against the accused persons. Hence, the present bail application has been Eled. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is further submitted that the applicant has neither committed nor participated in any act constituting the alleged o=ences. The prosecution evidence, as collected so far, is prima facie insu0cient to connect the applicant with the commission of the aforesaid o=ences, and his implication is based solely on the memorandum statement of the co-accused, which has no independent corroboration. No incriminating article has been seized from the possession of the present applicant. It is also submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 05.10.2025 and is a young man aged about 22 years, the charge-sheet has already been Eled, and he has no any previous criminal antecedents, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable amount of time. 3 Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the prosecution case clearly discloses the active involvement of the accused persons. He further submits that the accused were caught red-handed by the patrolling police party while attempting to break open the shutter of the complainant’s shop during late night hours, which itself shows their criminal intent. The o=ence was committed at odd hours, causing fear and insecurity, and the accused attempted to Bee from the spot but were apprehended on the spot. In view of the gravity of the o=ence, the manner in which it was committed, and the prima facie material available on record, 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 no incriminating article has been seized from the possession of the applicant, and that his implication is primarily based on the memorandum statement of the co-accused, coupled with the fact that the evidence collected by the prosecution does not prima facie establish his direct involvement in the alleged o=ence, and further taking into account his young age of about 22 years, the charge- sheet has been Eled, and the applicant is in jail since 05.10.2025, he has no previous criminal antecedents and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime, I am of the opinion that the applicant 4 is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Tarun Suryavanshi, involved in Crime No. 907/2025, registered at Police Station – Janjgir, District Janjgir – Champa, (C.G.) for the o=ence punishable under Section 331(4)(5), 305(A), 310(4), 312, 296, 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 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 Ele an undertaking to the e=ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates Exed 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 Exed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su0cient 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 5 and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date Exed 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 Exed 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 su0cient 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. O0ce is directed to provide a certiEed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek