1 2026:CGHC:15316 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2957 of 2026 Maharana Pardhi S/o Suresh Pardhi Aged About 26 Years R/o Village- Unida, Police Station- Gunga, District- Bhopal (M.P.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Marwahi, District- Gaurela- Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dhirendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02.04.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 211/2025 registered at Police Station – Marwahi, District- Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(3), 305(A), 112, 317(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 09.12.2025, the complainant, Jeevan Yadav, lodged a written report stating that unknown person(s) committed theft in his house during daytime by breaking open the back door. It was alleged that the following articles were stolen: one PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.04.02 18:02:38 +0530 2 gold necklace, five mangalsutras, four gold rings, three gold leaves, three pairs of gold earrings, one gold jhumka, one gold locket, one gold chain, seventeen silver anklets, two sets of silver bracelets, six sets of silver bangles, one silver chain, two silver lockets, twenty silver toe rings, one silver bowl, three silver rings, along with cash amounting to Rs.2,15,000/-. The total value of the stolen property is stated to be Rs.7,50,000/-. On the basis of the said complaint, an FIR was registered for the offence of house-breaking and theft under Sections 331(3) and 305(A) of the Indian Penal Code, vide Crime No. 211/2025 at Police Station Marwahi, District Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.). 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in the offence in question. He further submits that no stolen gold or silver ornaments were recovered from the possession of the applicant. As prosecution, itself, only an amount of Rs. 19,000/- and one mobile phone were seized, which cannot conclusively establish participation in the alleged theft. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has five previous criminal antecedents, out of which in three cases he has been acquitted, the same has been explained through covering memo. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant is in custody since 23.02.2026, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, learned counsel prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case. Further, as per the charge-sheet, during investigation, the memorandum statement of the applicant/accused, Maharana Pardhi, was duly recorded in the presence of independent witnesses. In his statement, the applicant admitted that he, along with co-accused Ponchi @ Yogi 3 Pardhi and Jespal, had conspired to commit theft. Pursuant to the said conspiracy, the co-accused committed theft at the complainant’s house, while the applicant remained present nearby on a motorcycle to facilitate their escape. After the commission of the offence, the applicant assisted the co-accused in fleeing from the spot and subsequently shared in the proceeds from the sale of stolen jewellery. The applicant received Rs.35,000/-, out of which Rs.19,000/- was recovered from his possession. Further, the mobile phone used during the commission of the offence was also produced by him. On the basis of the said memorandum, Rs.19,000/- and one Redmi 5G mobile phone were seized from the possession of the applicant. Moreover, the applicant has five previous criminal antecedents. Hence, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed, further the applicant has five previous criminal antecedents, out of which he has been acquitted in three case, and he is in jail since 23.02.2026, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the Applicant- Maharana Pardhi, involved in Crime No. 211/2025 registered at Police Station – Marwahi, District- Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(3), 305(A), 112, 317(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’), be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to 4 the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the 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. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti