1 2026:CGHC:19660 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2838 of 2026 Rahul Suryavanshi S/o Rajesh Suryavanshi Aged About 19 Years R/o Azad Chowk, Mangla, P.S. Civil Line, Distt. Bilaspur, C.G. --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Station House Officer, Police Civil Line, District – Bilaspur, C.G. --- Non-applicant Along with MCRC No. 2841 of 2026 Rahul Suryavanshi S/o Rajesh Suryavanshi Aged About 19 Years R/o Azad Chowk, Mangla, P.S. Civil Line, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Civil Line, District – Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Megha Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 28.04.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime Nos. 120/2026 and 121/2026, registered at Police Station – Civil Line, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under 331(4), 305 read with Section 3(5) of BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution in MCRC No.2838/2026, is that on RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 19.01.2026 complainant Ved Prakash Mehar R/o Maitripuram Colony, Akash Marg Mangla went to Banaras with family and returned on 21.01.2026 and had seen that lock was broken and Rs. 15,000/- cash and DVR of camera worth Rs. 5,000/- were stolen by some unknown person thereafter report was lodged by the complainant on the basis of report an FIR registered against unknown persons and during the course of investigation, the applicant and the co-accused persons have been arrested. 3. The case of the prosecution in MCRC No.2841/2026, is that on 25.01.2026, the complainant Atul Soni lodged report at Police Station concerned that he is running Jewelry Shop in the name of Maa Jewelers at Azad Chowk, Mangla, Bilaspur, in the night between 25- 26.01.2026 some unknown persons opened the shutter of shop of complainant and stolen the gold and silver ornaments as well as cash total to the tune of Rs. 3,75,000/- from his shop. On the basis of above report, the offence was registered against the unknown person and during the course of investigation the applicant has been arrested. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there is one more criminal antecedent of the applicant in which he has been acquitted. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in these cases. The applicant is in jail since 26.01.2026 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail 3 application and submits that there is one more criminal antecedent of the applicant, and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that the applicant along with the co-accused is said to have committed the crime of theft, hence, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there is one more criminal antecedent of the applicant in which he has been acquitted and charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, furthermore, the applicant is in jail since 26.01.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 8. Let applicant, Rahul Suryavanshi, involved in Crime Nos. 120/2026 and 121/2026, registered at Police Station – Civil Line, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under 331(4), 305 read with Section 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 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. 4 (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. 9. 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 Rajshekhar