1 CGHC010368182026 2026:CGHC:42818 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8815 of 2026 1 - Raja Singh S/o Rajmani Singh Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Ward No. 18 Nandganv, Police Station Bijuri, Distt. Anuppur, M.P. ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Avadhesh Mishra, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 01.10.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 298/2026, registered at Police Station, Mahasamund District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 305(a), 331(4) and 3(5) of BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a complaint on 18.05.2026 alleging that during the intervening night of 17.05.2026 and 18.05.2026, some unknown persons committed theft of gold and silver ornaments and other articles worth 98,000/-. ₹ Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2026.10.01 19:04:47 +0530 2 Pursuant to the complaint, the FIR was registered against the applicant for the offences, as stated above. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the police have not recovered any stolen articles from the possession of the present applicant. The applicant has one criminal antecedent of the year 2023, which is still pending. He further submits that the charge- sheet has already been filed and the applicant is in jail since 21.06.2026. He, therefore, prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel would oppose the bail application and submit that the applicant has one criminal antecedent. However, she fairly submits that no stolen articles have been recovered from the present applicant. Out of seven accused persons, three are absconding. Therefore, the application filed by the applicant for grant of bail may be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the applicant has one criminal antecedent of the year 2023; no stolen articles have been seized from his possession; the charge-sheet has already been filed; the applicant is in custody since 21.06.2026; and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to grant bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the 3 satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail, on following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient 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 fixed 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 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 in accordance with law. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Jyoti