Chattisgarh High Court
Monu @ Deepanshu Manjhi vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12157
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2417 of 2026
Monu @ Deepanshu Manjhi S/o Late Krishna Manjhi Aged About 19
Years R/o Mukut Nagar, Near Pani Tanki, Raipur, P.S. Azad Chowk,
Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Amleshwar, District- Durg,
Chhattisgarh.
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Tarun Dansena, Advocate
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
13.03.2026
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. 158/2025 registered at Police Station- Amleshwar, District- Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 305(A), 331(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a report at Police Station Amleshwar on 28.11.2025 stating that his RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 brother, along with his family members, had gone out of town on 20.11.2025 at about 10:30 PM. Thereafter, the complainant received a phone call from his brother informing him that their neighbour had called and informed him that the lock of his house had been broken and a theft had taken place. Upon reaching the house and entering inside, they found that the household articles were scattered and gold and silver jewellery kept in the cupboard was found missing, which had allegedly been stolen by unknown persons. During the course of investigation, the police arrested the aforementioned three accused persons in connection with the said incident. On the basis of the report, the police registered an offence under Sections 305A, 331(4), and 3(5) of the B.N.S., and after completion of the entire investigation, a charge sheet has been filed before the learned J.M.F.C., Bhilai-3, District Durg (C.G.). Hence, this bail application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any act which would justify his conviction under the alleged sections. It is further submitted that there is no direct evidence connecting the applicant with the alleged offence and the entire prosecution case is based merely on suspicion and conjectures. He also submits that no recovery of the alleged stolen article has been effected from the possession of the present applicant and there is no legally admissible material available on record to establish the involvement of the applicant in the commission of the alleged offence. He further submits that similarly 3 situated co-accused person, namely, Rahul Sonkar has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 30.01.2026 in MCRC No. 1015/2026. He also submits that the applicant has only one criminal antecedent, and he is in jail since 29.11.2025, the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. It is further submitted that the applicant has two previous criminal antecedents and a recovery of gold and silver ornaments has been made from his possession during the investigation. Therefore, considering the said recovery and the nature of the allegations, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.
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, nature and gravity of offence, the fact that though the present applicant and other co-accused had broken the lock of the house and committed theft of gold and silver ornaments and from the possession of the present applicant gold and silver ornaments has been seized and the applicant has two criminal antecedents, but other co-accused person, namely, Rahul Sonkar has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 30.01.2026 in MCRC No. 1015/2026, and the case of present applicant is identical to that 4 of the co-accused person, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case and he is jail since 29.11.2025, the conclusion of the trial will take some more time, hence, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant - Monu @ Deepanshu Manjhi, involved in Crime No. 158/2025 registered at Police Station- Amleshwar, District- Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 305(A), 331(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two 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 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. 5
(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