1 CGHC010307512026 2026:CGHC:38905 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No.7375 of 2026 Mohammad Araslan S/o. Mohammad Zabbir Khan, Aged About 19 Years R/o. - Shantinagar, Patthalgaon, Police Station - Patthalgaon And District - Jashpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Of The Police Station – Jutemill, Tahsil And District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Non-applicant _____________________________________________________ For Applicant :Mr. Abhishek Saraf, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Mr. Shubham Bajpai, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.09.2026 1. The Applicant has preferred this 1st Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.09.03 10:58:34 +0530 2 connection with Crime No.86/2026 registered at Police Station – Jutemill, Tahsil and District Raigarh (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 331(4), 305(E), 112(2), 238 and 3(5) of BNS. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the Branch Manager of Punjab National Bank, PatelpalI Branch, Raigarh, lodged a written report at Police Station Jutmil stating that after closing the bank at about 8:15 p.m. on 16.03.2026, he was informed by Head Constable Ramnath Banerjee between 1:47 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. on 17.03.2026 that the locks of the bank had been found broken during checking. Upon reaching the bank, he found that both locks of the shutter gate and one lock of the channel gate had been broken, the POE of the CCTV DVR, network junction box, electrical connection and wires connected to the CCTV cameras had been cut into pieces and an attempt had also been made to break open the cash vault inside the bank. Accordingly, the offences as mentioned above were registered against the Applicant. Hence this application. 3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that there is no direct evidence connecting the Applicant with the alleged offence and it cannot be said 3 that the seized contraband exclusively belongs to him. It is further submitted that the Applicant is an innocent poor villager and the sole bread earner of his joint family, is in custody since 29.03.2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed and the offence is triable by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, with maximum punishment of one year, therefore, considering the period of custody, further detention of the Applicant is not justified. It is lastly submitted that nothing has been seized at the instance of the present Applicant and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, he may be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the material available in the case diary, the nature of allegations, the fact that the Applicant is in custody since 29.03.2026, the case is triable by the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, he has already been granted bail in another crime arising out of the same memorandum, i.e. Crime No.52/2026 registered at Police Station Gharghoda, District Raigarh, vide order dated 29.07.2026 passed by this 4 Court in M.Cr.C. No.5586/2026, the trial is likely to take considerable time and without further commenting anything upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let Applicant- Mohammad Araslan involved in Crime No. 86/2026 registered at Police Station – Jutemill, Tahsil and District Raigarh (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 331(4), 305(E), 112(2), 238 and 3(5) of BNS 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 file an undertaking to the effect that he/she 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 applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/her counsel. In case of his/her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her 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/her presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such 5 proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/her, 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 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 applicant 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/her 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 forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Priya