Raipur, Chhattisgarh v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Thana In
Case Details
1 KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2025:CGHC:49465 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7658 of 2025 Rashid Khan @ Babu Khan S/o Mohammad Khan Aged About 52 Years R/o Gaji Nagar Birgav, Ward No. 30, Police Station Urla, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Thana In-Charge, P.S. Kotra Road, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
accused. Prima facie, there is evidence in the case that the stolen vehicle was taken by the applicant/accused himself. The case also indicates that the applicant/accused is the main perpetrator of the theft, who carried out the act personally. Therefore, releasing the applicant on bail does not appear appropriate. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 1820/2025, vide order dated 06.03.2025 and 4 the present applicant has been implicated only on the basis of memorandum statement and he is is in jail since 16.05.2025 and against him supplementary charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and further he has no criminal antecedent and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Let applicant, Rashid Khan @ Babu, involved in Crime No. 500/2024, registered at Police Station : Kotra Road, District- Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 303(2), 238, 317(4), 324(5), 3(5) of BNS and Section 130(3)/177 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, 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 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, 5 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. 8. 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
Arguments
: Mr. Rajendra Tripathi, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 26.09.2025 Order on Board 1. 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. 500/2024, registered at Police Station : Kotra Road, District- Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 303(2), 238, 317(4), 324(5), 3(5) of BNS and Section 130(3)/177 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant 2 Mahboob Khan had filed a report at the police station regarding the theft of his trailer vehicle on the night of 07.12.2024. During the investigation of the case, based on the memorandum statements of the other accused in the case, the applicant/accused Rashid Khan alias Babu Khan was questioned under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, and his memorandum statement was recorded, in which he stated that, he came from Raipur to Bilaspur Titlagarh by train on 07.12.2024 to go to Raigarh for theft. He knew that if he carried a mobile phone with him, the police would trace him; therefore, he did not carry a mobile phone. On 07-08/08/2024, he got down at Raigarh railway station and went by auto to Jindal Plant, where many vehicles were kept in the yard. He went inside and saw a trailer vehicle parked near the petrol pump, which was covered with a lot of dust. He then waited for nightfall, when the lights at the petrol pump were switched off, he quietly entered the vehicle and disconnected its GPS system. After that, he started the vehicle using his master key and took it through the forest behind the Jinder Company, via Kharsia and Dabhra, reaching Raipur. He has known Ghazi Khan(co-accused) for 3–4 years and had previously worked with him in selling vehicle parts as scrap. He showed the vehicle to Ghazi and asked him to sell it. Then both of them met Sheikh Hamid alias Guddu (co-accused) and a deal was finalized for ₹4,70,000/- Therefore, the aforementioned offences were registered against the applicant along with co-accused. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further 3 submits that the co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 1820/2025, vide order dated 06.03.2025 and the present applicant has been implicated only on the basis of memorandum statement of the co-accused and he is is in jail since 16.05.2025 and against him supplementary charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and further he has no criminal antecedent and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case, the stolen trailer vehicle bearing registration number CG11AB1587 has been recovered from the co-accused Sheikh Hamid alias Guddu. The offence alleged against the applicant is of a serious nature and at present, criminal activities involving theft have increased significantly. Granting bail in such a situation would empower the