Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:48584 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6421 of 2025 Sanjay Vaishnav S/o Daheshwar Vaishnav Aged About 30 Years R/o Niharik Sada Colony Ews 18, Police Station Civil Line Rampur District Korba (C.G.) ...Applicant VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.09.23 11:31:08 +0530 versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kusmunda, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22.09.2025 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. 249/2024 registered at Police Station – Kusmunda District - Korba (C.G.) offence under Sections 331(4), 305(A) & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution's case, in brief, is that the complainant is a resident of Prem Nagar Kusmunda and on dated 04.07.2024 he along 2 with his family has gone to Bilaspur for treatment of her mother, that on dated 15.07.2024 the neighbour of complainant has called and informed him that the lock of front gate of his house has been broken down by some unknown person. That, upon getting the said information complainant immediately rushed back to his home where he found that the lock of front gate and main gate has been broken down by some unknown person and upon entering his house, he has discovered that a theft has been committed whereby Rs. 20,000/-, two gold jewellery worth of Rs. 10,000/-, rain coat, clothes, aadhar card and other household materials were stolen. That on the said allegation a FIR has been registered against unknown person on dated 15.07.2024 registered as FIR no. 249/2024 for the offence under section 331 (4), 305 (A), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 against unknown person. 3. The applicant respectfully submits that he has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of speculative and unsubstantiated allegations. The seizure made from him consists only of ordinary household items such as Rs. 4,000/-, a saree, perfume, and raincoats, which do not establish any link with the alleged theft. He has been arrested merely on the memorandum of a co-accused, without any independent evidence, though the FIR itself was registered against “unknown persons.” The applicant is a 30-year-old daily wager engaged in catering services, the sole breadwinner of his family, and his mother is suffering from medical ailments. Prolonged incarceration at such a young age would adversely affect his rehabilitation and social reputation. He has no prior criminal record and is not a habitual offender. The investigation is complete, charge-sheet has been filed, 3 and trial is likely to take a long time to conclude. Continued detention would violate his fundamental right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, as repeatedly emphasized by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI (2012), Hussainara Khatoon (III) v. State of Bihar (1980), and State of Kerala v. Raneef (2011). The applicant is a permanent resident of Gerwaghat, District Korba, Chhattisgarh, with no likelihood of absconding or tampering with evidence, and he undertakes to abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant has five criminal antecedents, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, that the applicant has been in custody since 18.07.2025, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Let the Applicant – Sanjay Vaishnav, involved in Crime No. 249/2024 registered at Police Station – Kusmunda District - Korba (C.G.) offence under Sections 331(4), 305(A) & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial in accordance with law within a period of six months , if there is no legal impediment. 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 vaibhav