01Facts
On 5 July 2026, Mahadev Rao Uprikar, a Supervisor with Bharat Rail Auto Mission Company, lodged a report alleging that an unknown person had stolen ₹7,000 from the company’s cabin and damaged company property worth approximately ₹1,00,000.
¶ 1–5An FIR was registered at Police Station Dipka, District Korba, for offences under Sections 305(a), 331(4), 324(5) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).
¶ 1–5During investigation, Suban Rohidas was arrested in connection with the offence and remained in custody from 5 July 2026.
¶ 1–5The applicant contended that he had been implicated solely on the memorandum of a co-accused, that no stolen property or money had been recovered from him, and that he had no criminal antecedents.
¶ 1–5The State opposed the application but submitted that the charge-sheet had already been filed.
¶ 1–502Issues
i.1. Whether the applicant should be granted regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 304/2026?
¶ 1, 5–6ii.2. Whether the applicant’s custody period, absence of criminal antecedents, filing of the charge-sheet, and the likely delay in conclusion of trial justified release on bail?
¶ 603Law Applied
The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which empowers the High Court to grant regular bail to a person accused of an offence and in custody.
¶ 1The alleged offences were under Sections 305(a), 331(4), 324(5) and 3(5) of the BNS.
¶ 1–2In determining bail, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the allegations, the applicant’s criminal antecedents, the period of custody, the filing of the charge-sheet, and the likely duration of the trial.
¶ 6–7The Court also imposed conditions intended to secure the applicant’s presence and prevent misuse of the liberty of bail.
¶ 6–7Provisions in the judgment · 9 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483Section 84Section 351
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 305Section 331Section 324Section 3Section 269Section 209
04Reasoning
The Court noted that the applicant had no criminal antecedents, had been in judicial custody since 5 July 2026, and that the charge-sheet had already been filed, reducing the immediate necessity for continued custodial detention.
¶ 6It further considered that the trial was likely to take considerable time.
¶ 6Although the allegations involved theft and damage to company property, the Court found the circumstances sufficient to grant bail, subject to safeguards requiring the applicant to attend the trial, avoid unnecessary adjournments when witnesses were present, and appear personally at key stages including opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of his statement.
¶ 705Holding
The High Court allowed the first regular bail application and directed that Suban Rohidas be released in Crime No. 304/2026 upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.
¶ 1, 6–7The release was subject to conditions concerning attendance, non-seeking of adjournments when witnesses were present, personal appearance at specified stages, and consequences for misuse of bail or failure to appear pursuant to proclamation.
¶ 7A certified copy of the order was directed to be sent to the trial Court for compliance.
¶ 8Original Court PDF
SUBAN ROHIDASvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
