Atal Awas Pendri, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:15309 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2523 of 2025 Devendra Sori S/o Surjeet Sori (Wrongly Mentioned As Surji Sori) Aged About 19 Years R/o Atal Awas Pendri, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Khairagarh, District Khairagarh-Chuikhadan-Gandai (KCG) Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN For Applicant(s) :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01/04/2025 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. 280/2023 registered at Police Station Khairagarh, District Khairagarh-Chuikhadan-Gandai (KCG) (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 341/149, 294, 506-II, 323 2 and 395 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on June 12, 2023, at around 9:45 P.M., Ganeshu Yadav filed a report at the Khairagarh Police Station, alleging therein that he worked at Shubham's Mart in Khairagarh. After closing the shop that evening, he was riding his motorcycle (CG 08 AL 9595) with his friend Vikki Tandon when they were assaulted and robbed by the accused near Gram Dapka Mod on the Khairagarh-Rajnandgaon main road. The accused allegedly abused and threatened to kill them, assaulting them. They stole a Realme 9 Pro 5G mobile phone, Rs.5,000/- in cash, a silver chain worth Rs.1,500/-, and a POCO C-3 mobile phone from Vikki. The accused also demanded the ATM PIN and threatened to stab them with a knife before fleeing. Based on alleged incident FIR has been lodged and during the investigation, witness statements were recorded, a site map was prepared, and the accused were taken into custody. Their memorandums were recorded, and they confessed to the crime. The stolen property was recovered, and the silver chain was found to have been sold by the accused, Jitendra Soni. The accused were arrested. 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 the applicant has not played any role in commission of alleged offence, further there is no recovery of alleged looted articles i.e. mobile phone, silver chain or ATM card has been made from the present applicant except a motorcycle which the applicant drove at the time of alleged incident, even the 3 complainant himself has turned hostile. He also submits that one of the identically situated co-accused, namely, Amit Singh has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 13.11.2024 in MCRC No.7530/2024. The applicant is in jail since 14.06.2023, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, 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. He further submits that the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons have assaulted the complainant and his friend and they stole a Realme 9 Pro 5G mobile phone, Rs.5,000/- in cash, a silver chain worth Rs.1,500/-, and a POCO C-3 mobile phone from Vikki, further there is recovery of Rs.1,000/- from present applicant and applicant has one criminal antecedent under the IPC, therefore, he 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 14.06.2023, the fact that though the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons have assaulted the complainant and his friend, they stole a Realme 9 Pro 5G mobile phone, Rs.5,000/- in cash, a silver chain worth Rs.1,500/-, and a POCO C-3 mobile phone from Vikki (friend of complainant) and there is recovery of Rs.1,000/- from present applicant, but one of the co-accused, namely, Amit 4 Singh has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 13.11.2024 in MCRC No.7530/2024, copy of which is annexed as Annexure A/2 and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused, so far as criminal antecedent of the applicant is concerned, applicant has only one criminal antecedent under the IPC, further 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. Let the Applicant-Devendra Sori, involved in Crime No. 280/2023 registered at Police Station Khairagarh, District Khairagarh- Chuikhadan-Gandai (KCG) (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 341/149, 294, 506-II, 323 and 395 of IPC, 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 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 5 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. 8. OfÏce 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