1 CGHC010286682026 2026:CGHC:38694 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No.7014 of 2026 1 - Pawan Patidar S/o Mogji Patidar Aged About 29 Years R/o P.S. Gadhi, Distt. Baswada, Rajasthan. Applicant (s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Amanaka, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Respondent(s) MCRC No.7243 of 2026 1 - Ramsingh Ninama S/o Kaluram Ninama Aged About 49 Years R/o Ward No.01, Sevna, District Sabaswada Rajasthan. Applicant (s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Amanaka, Raipur District Raipur C.G. Respondent(s) For Applicant (s) : Mr. Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate For Respondent (s) : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, PL Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board Digitally signed by R NIRALA 2 01.09.2026 1. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants, who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.193/2026, registered at Police Station Amanaka, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 305, 331 (4) & 3 (5) of BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a missing report to the concerned police station that on the date of incident, some unknown persons entered entered in the wine shop and they committed theft of cash amount of Rs.7,05,580/- and D.V.R. liquor from wine shop. On the basis of the report, the Police registered the offence against unknown persons and after investigation the applicants were arrested on the basis of memorandum statement. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in crime in question. It is further submitted that the applicants have been arrested only on the basis of memorandum statement of other co-accused persons. He further submitted that the applicants are in jail since 29.06.2026, the applicant Pawan Patidar has only one criminal antecedent, whereas the applicant Ramsingh Ninama has no criminal antecedents, charge sheet has not yet been filed and trial is likely to take quite long time for its 3 conclusion, therefore, they pray that the applicants be released on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail applications of the applicants and submits that there are 5 criminal antecedents and 4 are between 2013 to 2016, whereas one is of the year 2025 against the applicants, as such they are habitual offender and thus they are not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation and further considering that the applicants are in jail since 29.06.2026, the criminal antecedents against the applicants are old and stale, charge sheet is yet to be filed and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow these applications. 7. Accordingly, the instant bail applications of the applicants are allowed. 8. Let the Applicants – Pawan Patidar and Ramsingh Ninama, involved in Crime No.193/2026, registered at Police Station Amanaka, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 305, 331 (4) & 3 (5) of BNS, be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties in 4 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 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 him in accordance with law.” 5 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Nirala