SUBAN ROHIDAS vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010294562026 2026:CGHC:38421
NAFR
VAIBHAV
SINGH
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed by
VAIBHAV SINGH
Date: 2026.09.01
11:07:28 +0530
MCRC No. 6945 of 2026
Suban Rohidas S/o Amarsay Rohidas Aged About 30 Years R/o Village
Kasaipali, Thana Dipka, District Korba (C.G.) ...Applicant


versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station Dipka, District Korba (C.G.)
... Non-applicant

For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Order on Board
31.08.2026
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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with
Crime No. 304/2026 registered at Police Station - Dipka, District Korba
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 305(a), 331(4),
324(5) & 3(5) of the BNS.

2
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 05.07.2026, the complainant,
namely Mahadev Rao Uprikar, who is working as a Supervisor with
Bharat Rail Auto Mission Company, lodged a written report against an
unknown person, alleging that the said unknown person had
committed theft of Rs.7,000/- from the cabin of the company and had
also caused damage to the company's property to the tune of
approximately Rs.1,00,000/-. On the basis of the said written
complaint, the police registered FIR/Crime No. 304/2026 against an
unknown person for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4),
305(A), 324(5) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. During the course of
investigation, the police arrested the present applicant in connection
with the aforesaid offence.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has
no connection with the alleged crime. It is further submitted that the
applicant is aged about 30 years and is working as a labourer.
Learned counsel submits that the applicant has been implicated in the
present case merely on the basis of the memorandum of the co-
accused and that he is in custody since 05.07.2026. It is further
submitted that no stolen article or money has been seized from the
possession of the applicant. Learned counsel also submits that the
supervisor himself had committed theft of the articles and money
belonging to the company and, in order to conceal his own act, lodged
a false report against an unknown person. It is further submitted that
the case is triable by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, the applicant
is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title,
there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the

3
prosecution evidence, and he is ready to abide by all the terms and
conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court. The applicant
reserves his right to raise any other grounds at the time of hearing.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non-
applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-
sheet has already been filed before the competent Court.
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, the
nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the
fact that he has no criminal antecedents, and further considering that
the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the
applicant has been in judicial custody since 05.07.2026, and the
conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, I am inclined
to grant regular bail to the present applicant.
7. Let the Applicant - Suban Rohidas, involved in Crime No. 304/2026
registered at Police Station - Dipka, District Korba (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Sections 305(a), 331(4), 324(5) & 3(5) of the
BNS, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local
sureties each 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

4
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 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 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 him 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..
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
vaibhav