Shashikant Chikwa vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Sinha, CJ

This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 253/2025 registered at Police Station - Gharghoda District - Raigarh (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 303(2), 112(2), 3(5) of the BNS.

The prosecution story in nutshell is that, on 22-09-2025 the complainant Kailash Kumar Paraste, who is the supervisor of Mahaveer Energy And Coal Benefication Ltd. Bhengari, filed a written report at P.S. Gharghoda with the averment that they had installed two batteries in the pump house for power backup which were stollen by unknown person on the intervening night of 14.09.2025 15.09.2025. Based on this report, FIR of crime No. 253/2025 was registered at P.S. Gharghoda against an unknown person and the applicants were arrested on the basis of doubt

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He also submits that when the FIR was initially lodged against unknown persons, and the applicants were subsequently arrested upon false accusations despite having no involvement in the alleged offence. No stolen article has been recovered from applicant No. 02, and although batteries are alleged to have been seized from applicant No. 01, the applicants were first arrested in another case and thereafter implicated in the present case solely on suspicion. There is an unexplained delay of about six days in lodging the FIR, and immediately thereafter the applicants were implicated without any evidence, which is further supported by the police prativedan filed before the court below. The applicants are daily wage labourers and sole bread earners of their families, and their continued detention is causing severe financial hardship and affecting their mental well-being. The only allegation against them rests on suspicion, and the prosecution has failed to collect any cogent evidence to establish their involvement. They have been arrested merely on the basis of a memorandum statement, which is not an admissible piece of evidence. The applicants are young individuals and have been in jail since 23.09.2025, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant.

On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, and further considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence levelled against the present applicants, as well as the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and that the applicants have been in judicial custody since 23.09.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in the present case.

Let the Applicant – Shashikant Chikwa, & Dinesh Rathiya involved in Crime No. 253/2025 registered at Police Station - Gharghoda District - Raigarh (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 303(2), 112(2), 3(5) of the BNS, be released on bail on his 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 applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law.

Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.