SAHIL SONI vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010336542026 2026:CGHC:38803

NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 8063 of 2026
Sahil Soni S/o Sanjay Soni Aged About 21 Years R/o Bhawani Nagar
Kota, Police Station Saraswati Nagar Tehsil And District Raipur C. G.
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Khamhardih, District Raipur
C. G.
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate
For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Deputy Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Order on Board
02.09.2026
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 applicant who has been arrested in
connection with Crime No. 153/2026 registered at Police Station-
Khamhardih, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under
Sections 331(4), 305(a), 317(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
RAHUL
DEWANGAN
Sanhita, 2023.
Digitally
signed by
RAHUL
DEWANGAN
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant runs a
gold and silver jewellery business in the name and style of “Lakshya

2
Jewellers”, situated on Lodhipara Road near Arogya Hospital,
within the jurisdiction of Police Station Khamhardih. It is alleged that
on 09 May 2026, at about 9:15 PM, the complainant and his
younger brother, Lakshya Murpani, closed the shop as usual,
secured the outer shutter with two locks and left for their residence.
Various gold and silver ornaments, gold coins, gold biscuit pieces
and approximately Rs.15,000/- in cash were allegedly kept inside
the shop. As the following day was Sunday, the shop remained
closed. On 11 May 2026, at about 11:00 AM, when Lakshya
Murpani went to open the shop, he found the shutter closed but
both locks missing. Upon opening the shop, he found the premises
ransacked, with empty boxes scattered and the jewellery and cash
missing. The complainant and his father were informed and, upon
reaching the spot, they allegedly found that approximately 500
grams of gold ornaments, 15 kilograms of silver ornaments and
Rs.15,000/- in cash, having a total estimated value of about Rs.90
lakhs, had been stolen. It is further alleged that the CCTV footage
revealed that two unknown persons had cut open the locks and
entered the shop between about 2:00 AM and 3:00 AM on the
intervening night of 10 and 11 May 2026 and committed the theft.
Hence, the present bail application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and
that he has no connection whatsoever with the alleged offence. It is
further submitted that the prosecution case against the applicant is
based primarily on suspicion and the memorandum statement of a

3
co-accused, and that the applicant has neither any acquaintance
nor any connection with the other co-accused persons. He further
submits that the applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity, as
similarly situated co-accused Kaushal Kumar Sah, who was also
implicated on the basis of a memorandum statement and from
whom similar silver articles, namely a silver coin, ring, bunch of
keys and bracelet, were allegedly seized, has already been granted
regular bail by this Court vide order dated 18.08.2026 passed in
MCRC No. 7630 of 2026. It is submitted that the present applicant
stands on the same footing as the said co-accused. He further
submits that there are serious procedural irregularities in the
manner of the applicant’s arrest and alleged seizure, inasmuch as
the applicant was deboarded from a train at Shikohabad Railway
Station on 17.05.2026 on the instructions of the police, but no
search was conducted at the railway station, thereafter, he was
handed over to the police staff of Police Station Khamhardih and
brought to Raipur, and a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS
was subsequently issued to him on 18.05.2026, whereas the
alleged seizure of articles from his pocket and purse was shown on
19.05.2026 at about 7:00 PM. It is lastly submitted that the
applicant is a young person aged about 21 years, has no criminal
antecedents, is a regular student pursuing graduation and has a
clean background, he is in jail since 19.05.2026, the charge-sheet
has already been filed before the competent Court and trial is likely
to take some more time. Hence, he prays that the applicant may
kindly be enlarged on bail.

4
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail
application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has
been filed before the competent Court. He also submits that the
allegations against the applicant are serious in nature, relating to
the theft of gold and silver ornaments and cash worth approximately
Rs.90 lakhs from the complainant’s jewellery shop. It is submitted
that during investigation, the involvement of the applicant has
emerged on the basis of the memorandum statement of a co-
accused and the subsequent seizure of silver articles allegedly
connected with the offence from the possession of the applicant. He
further submits that the applicant’s alleged role cannot be brushed
aside merely on the ground that he was not named in the FIR, as
the investigation has subsequently disclosed his involvement in the
commission of the offence. Hence, considering the seriousness of
the offence and the material collected during investigation, he prays
for rejection of the bail application.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused
the case diary.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the
submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the
material available on record, this Court finds that though the
allegation against the applicant is that he was involved in the theft of
gold and silver ornaments and cash worth approximately Rs.90
lakhs from the complainant’s jewellery shop and that certain silver
articles were allegedly seized from his possession, but the
prosecution case against him is primarily based upon the

5
memorandum statement of a co-accused. It is also relevant to note
that the co-accused Kaushal Kumar Sah, who was allegedly
implicated on similar material and from whom similar silver articles
were seized, and who has already been granted bail by this Court
vide order dated 18.08.2026 in MCRC No.7630 of 2026. Further
considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents,
is a young person aged about 21 years and is a student pursuing
graduation, the applicant is in jail since 17.05.2026 and the charge-
sheet has already been filed, thereby indicating that his further
custodial detention is not required for the purpose of investigation.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and
considering the principle of parity, the period of custody undergone,
absence of criminal antecedents and the fact that the trial is likely to
take some time, this Court is of the considered view that the present
applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the
applicant - Sahil Soni, involved in Crime No. 153/2026 registered
at Police Station- Khamhardih, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence
punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(a), 317(2) and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his
furnishing a personal bond with two local 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

6
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 sufficient
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 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 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance
forthwith
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Rahul Dewangan