1 2026:CGHC:17203 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3379 of 2026 Pappu Chandrakar S/o Tilak Ram Chandrakar Aged About 20 Years R/o Kurra Chowki Khandsara, District - Bemetara Chhattisgarh At Presetly R/o Rawanbhatha Sundar Nagar, Ward No. 12, P.S. Khamtrai, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Khamtrai, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mohammed Rashid, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.04.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 31/2026 registered at Police Station – Khamtarai, District – Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 14.01.2026, the complainant, namely Khemu Sahu, lodged an FIR at Police Station Khamtrai stating that, on 11.01.2026, he had gone along with his family to a nearby village. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.04.16 11:55:34 +0530 2 On 13.01.2026, the complainant received information from his neighbour that the lock of his house had been broken. Upon returning, he found the house ransacked and valuables missing. The total value of the stolen property was approximately Rs. 85,000/-. Accordingly, the police registered an FIR under Sections 331(4) and 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) against unknown persons and initiated an investigation. During the course of investigation, on 10.02.2026, the police arrested three persons, namely the present applicant, Pappu Chandrakar, along with co-accused Mohd. Irfan Ansari and Mohd. Asif Ahmed. It is alleged that certain articles were recovered from the possession of the applicant, including a gold locket and silver items, valued at approximately Rs. 51,000/-. Other recoveries were made from the co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. She also submits that the other co-accused person, namely, Irfan Ansari, has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 07.04.2026 in MCRC No. 3094 of 2026. Therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case. However, she could not dispute the fact that an identically situated co-accused has already been granted regular bail by this Court. 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, that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, further, the fact that the other 3 co-accused person, namely, Irfan Ansari, has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 07.04.2026 in MCRC No. 3094 of 2026, also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and that the applicant has been in custody since 10.02.2026, and that the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Bail of the Applicant – Pappu Chandrakar, involved in Crime No. 31/2026 registered at Police Station – Khamtarai, District – Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing 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. (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 4 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek