Baikunthpur (M.C.B.) (C.G.) v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Of
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:16206 NAFR KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2337 of 2025 Durgesh Jaiswal S/o Ashok Jaiswal Aged About 29 Years R/o Indranagar, Bada Bazar Chirmiri, Police Station And Tahsil- Chirmiri, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Baikunthpur (M.C.B.) (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Chirmiri, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Baikunthpur (M.C.B.) (Wrongly Mentioned As Korea In The Order-Sheet) (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 07.04.2025 Order on Board 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 295/2024, registered at Police Station : Chirmiri, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 305(a), 331(4) {wrongly mentioned as 331(6) in the order sheet}, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 04.12.2024, the 2 complainant has lodged an FIR against the accused before the concerned Police Station stating therein that the complainant Dr. Arti Tiwari was out of station from 29.11.2024, for taking care of the house, keys were handed over to maid Jyoti Pal who went to the house on 03.12.2024 and found that two doors of back side of the house were broken and the same was informed to the complainant. The complainant came back to her house and found that some unknown person broken into her house and after breaking the locker of almirah, cash amount and golden and silver ornaments were stolen by some unknown person. A written report was preferred by the complainant and investigation was initiated. During the course of investigation, suspected persons were taken into custody and on the basis of memorandum statement of the accused persons some articles were seized, applicant and co-accused were arrested, statement of the witnesses were recorded and after completion of the entire investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the present applicant has been arrested on the basis of memorandum statement, though the stolen articles were not seized from the exclusive possession of the present applicant and the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question though nothing has been seized from his possession. He further submits that the articles of the reported offence, has not 3 been seized from the exclusive possession of the present applicant, therefore, no offence would be made out against the present applicant but the police arrested the present applicant and all the pending investigations were lodged against the present applicant and he has been implicated in all pending cases of theft though nothing has been seized nor the present applicant accepted his offence, therefore, the present applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail in all the cases. He further submits that though he has been falsely implicated earlier also but he has never been convicted and sentenced for any kind of crime, thus it is clear that the present applicant has no criminal record and he is a hardworking laborer and never involved in crime in question and in the present case also, the cash amounting to Rs. 3000/- of the present applicant was seized from his possession and no theft articles were seized from the possession of the present applicant and the applicant is in jail since 06.12.2024 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, further the applicant has four criminal antecedents out of which only in one case, he has been acquitted and rest others are still pending moreover, it has been stated in the memorandum statement by the applicant/accused that all the accused persons went to the back door and co-accused, Deva Kewat broke the door with an iron pipe and they entered the house and broke the locker of the cupboard with an iron rod by 4 Deepak Dewar and Arun Bakhla and stolen the cash amount of Rs. 05 lakhs and a gold necklace, two pieces of gold earrings, 08 pieces of gold bracelets kept in the cupboard and further from the possession of the present applicant, one scooty i.e. Activa and Rs. 3000/- cash were seized. As such, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the present applicant has 04 criminal antecedents which has been clearly explained in the bail application in para No. 4(a) and further from possession of the applicant one scooty i.e. Activa and Rs. 3000/- cash were seized and the present applicant has been arrested only on the basis of memorandum statement and he is in jail since 06.12.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 8. Let applicant, Durgesh Jaiswal, involved in Crime No. 295/2024, registered at Police Station : Chirmiri, District- Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 305(a), 331(4) {wrongly mentioned as 331(6) in the order sheet}, 3(5) 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 5 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 sufÏcient 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 sufÏcient 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. 6 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Kunal Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice