1 2026:CGHC:7333 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1439 of 2026 Komeshwar @ Komu Nishad S/o Leeladhar Nishad Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Near Janpad Panchayat Gunderdehi, Tehsil and Police Station Gunderdehi, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S H O Police Station Padmanabhpur, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.02.2026 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 No. 301/2024, registered at Police Station – Padmanabhpur, District - Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (major correspondence Sections in IPC is 379 and 34). 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, the complainant Hari Belodhiya stated that on 01.08.2024, he was out of the station, and his mother was also away due to personal work. Upon returning on 04.08.2024, he found PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.02.11 12:39:09 +0530 2 that the door of his house had been broken and that one Hero Honda motorcycle and one home theatre had been stolen by unknown persons. He thereafter lodged the said report. During the course of investigation, the police came to know that certain persons had been apprehended by Police Station Gundardahi, and their memorandam statement were recorded, wherein they confessed to having committed the theft of a motorcycle from the house of the present complainant. Consequently, on transit remand, they were arrested by Police Station Padmanabhpur and were thus connected with the present case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that there is no any allegation of theft against the present applicant and nothing has been recovered from the possession of the present applicant. It is further submitted that the other co-accused, namely, Shohel @ Soher Khan have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 06.10.2025 passed in MCRC No. 7860/2025, further the applicant has 15 previous criminal antecedents, as explained in paragraph No. 4(A) of the bail application, the charge-sheet has already been filed. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 31.07.2025, and the trial is likely to take a considerable time for its conclusion. Therefore, learned counsel prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. The applicant is having 17 criminal antecedents, out of which 15 have been explained in paragraph No. 4(A) of the bail application, therefore he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the 3 documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the period of detention in jail since 31.07.2025, the fact that the co-accused, namely, Shohel @ Soher Khan have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 06.10.2025 passed in MCRC No. 7860/2025, further the applicant has previous criminal antecedents, which has been explained in paragraph No. 4(A) of the bail application, further the charge-sheet has already been filed, and further considering that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Komeshwar @ Komu Nishad, involved in Crime No. 301/2024, registered at Police Station – Padmanabhpur, District - Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy 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 4 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti