Bail granted where implication is based solely on co-accused's memorandum statement despite criminal antecedents.

The applicant sought regular bail following his arrest in connection with Crime No. 940/2025 at P.S. Civil Lines, Bilaspur

On August 17, 2025, a complainant allegedly discovered two individuals dismantling air conditioner parts and stealing copper wires, steel railings, and water taps from the old Chief Justice Bungalow

While one co-accused (Omprakash) was caught on the spot, the applicant allegedly escaped and was later arrested based on the co-accused's memorandum statement

The applicant has been in custody since August 26, 2025

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) despite having seven criminal antecedents and being named in a memorandum statement

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), regarding the grant of regular bail

It adhered to the principle that a memorandum statement of a co-accused lacks substantive evidentiary value without corroborating direct incriminating material

Sections 331(3), 305, and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) regarding house trespass and theft

Section 269 of the BNS (non-attendance in obedience to an order from public servant) and Section 84 of the BNSS (proclamation for person absconding) as conditions for the continuation of bail

The Court noted that while the applicant was accused of theft from a high-profile residence (the old Chief Justice Bungalow), his implication was primarily based on the memorandum statement of a co-accused and lacked direct incriminating evidence

Though the State argued the applicant was a habitual offender with seven criminal antecedents, the Court found that these antecedents had been "duly explained" by the applicant's counsel

Considering that the charge-sheet had already been filed, the applicant had served nearly eight months in jail, and the trial was expected to take considerable time, the Court determined that further incarceration was not warranted

The High Court allowed the bail application and ordered the release of Raja Vastrakar on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to strict conditions including mandatory presence during trial and prohibition on seeking adjournments.