Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) v. The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Station
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:45669 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7095 of 2025 1. Mannulal Pardhi S/o Shri Kanshiram Pardhi, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Village- Rohansi Thana and Tahsil Palari, Dist- Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) 2. Amar Singh Pardhi S/o Surajbhan Aged About 25 Years R/o Village - Rohansi Thana and Tahsil- Palari, District - Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) 3. Sanjay Kumar Pardhi S/o Surajbhan Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Rohansi Thana and Tahsil- Palari District - Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Applicants versus The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Station – Bilaigarh, District - Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicants
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.09.09 15:36:36 +0530 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.09. 202 5 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with 2 Crime No. 103/2025, registered at Police Station – Bilaigarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305, 112(2), 317(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that, the complainant, Shantilal Sahu, lodged a report on 01.04.2025 against unknown persons, stating that on the night of 31.03.2025, after having dinner, he, along with his wife and daughters, went to sleep, while his father, Radhai Sahu, was sleeping on the ground floor. During the night, some unknown persons allegedly entered the house and committed theft of cash amounting to Rs.1,60,000/- and jewellery kept in a box. The following morning, the complainant noticed that the door was open and the box containing the stolen cash and ornaments was missing. He, along with some neighbours, searched the nearby area and found the box lying in the badi (backyard/farm) of Sonau Kewat. Accordingly, a report was lodged, and the aforementioned offences were registered. During the course of investigation, based on suspicion, the police arrested the applicants and recorded their memorandum statements, wherein they allegedly disclosed that the stolen articles had been sold to Mahaveer Jain, the owner of Arihant Jewellers, for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-. Consequently, the co-accused was also arrested, and upon completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this 3 case. It is further submitted that the names of the applicants are not mentioned in the FIR, and no stolen articles have been recovered from them. He further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicants are in jail since 26.05.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that prima-facie there is a case on record against the applicants/accused, who are alleged to have committed theft jointly, involving cash amounting to approximately Rs. 2,40,000/- along with gold and silver ornaments, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the 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 applicants, and the fact that there are no criminal antecedents registered against applicant No.1, namely Mannulal Pardhi, and that applicant Nos. 2 and 3 have one criminal antecedent each, which have already been disposed of, further, considering that the charge-sheet has been filed against the applicants, they have been in custody since 26.05.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let applicant Nos. 1, 2 4 and 3 - Mannulal Pardhi, Amar Singh Pardhi and Sanjay Kumar Pardhi, involved in Crime No. 103/2025, registered at Police Station – Bilaigarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305, 112(2), 317(2), 3(5) of BNS, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (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 misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial 5 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. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Preeti Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice