1 2026:CGHC:16122 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3119 of 2026 Satyam Shukla S/o Rajesh Shukla, Aged About 25 Years R/o Pila Buglow, Lodhipara, Rental House Of The Sunil Pandey Near Sai Mandir, Pandri Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Ganj, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08/04/2026 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. 327/2025 registered at Police Station Ganj, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Sections 309(4), 3(5) of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the date of incident i.e. 12.12.2025 at about 07:30 PM, the complainant, namely, Devi Lal Teli, lodged a report at the concerned police station against three unknown persons alleging that they committed loot of Honda Shine motorcycle bearing registration No. CG/04/LU/0793 by showing a knife and also threatened him with the said weapon. It is further alleged that after committing the aforesaid offence, the accused persons fled away from the spot. On the basis of the said report, the police registered an offence under Sections 309(4), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that no seizure of any motorcycle or knife has been made from the possession of present applicant, only on the basis of suspicion, present applicant has been made an accused in the present case. He also submits that the identically situated co-accused, namely, Tarun Baghel has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.02.2026 passed in MCRC No.1740 of 2026. The applicant is in jail since 13.12.2025, the applicant has four criminal antecedents of the years 2021, 2022 and 2024 under the IPC and 3 NDPS Act, out of which the case under the NDPS Act has already been disposed of, further charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he 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 been filed in the present case. She further submits that the applicant is alleged to be one of the accused persons involved in the aforesaid incident and participated in the commission of loot of the motorcycle by threatening the complainant with a knife. So far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has five criminal antecedents under the IPC and NDPS Act, out of which, the case under NDPS has been disposed of and rest of the four cases are still pending, therefore, the applicant is a habitual offender and 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, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 13.12.2025, the fact that though the applicant is alleged to be one of the accused persons involved in the aforesaid incident and participated in the commission of loot of the motorcycle by threatening the complainant with a knife and has five criminal antecedents under the IPC and NDPS Act, out of which, the case 4 under NDPS has already been disposed of and rest of the four cases are still pending, but considering the fact that the co- accused, Tarun Baghel has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.02.2026 passed in MCRC No.1740 of 2026 and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused person, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Satyam Shukla, involved in Crime No. 327/2025 registered at Police Station Ganj, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(4), 3(5) of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 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 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. 5 (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. 9. 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 Akhil