Prince Raj @ Janu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2026 Latest Caselaw 174 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Prince Raj @ Janu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 27 February, 2026

Author: Ramesh Sinha

Bench: Ramesh Sinha

                                          1




                                                                  2026:CGHC:10260
                                                                           NAFR

               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                              MCRC No. 1928 of 2026
Prince Raj @ Janu S/o Late Shri Pramod Singh Aged About 29 Years R/o Tifra
Vegetable Market, P.S. Sirgitti, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)
                                                                      ... Applicant
                                       versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station- Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur
(C.G.)
                                                                   ... Non-applicant
For Applicant                 : Mr. Ritesh Verma, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State       : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer.

                    Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
                                Order on Board
27.02.2026


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. 503/2025 registered at Police Station Sarkanda District -

Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(4), 317(2)

and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short 'BNS').

2. As per the prosecution case, on 02.04.2025, Kumar Meravi appeared at

Police Station Sarkanda and reported an incident of robbery that allegedly

took place on 20.12.2025 under the Rapta Bridge. He stated that

unknown persons had taken his mobile phone (Vivo Y12) and his Activa

vehicle bearing registration No. CG-10-EM-1204. The total value of the

stolen property was stated to be approximately Rs. 30,000/-. The

charge-sheet has already been filed. The applicant has been in judicial

custody since 02.04.2025.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not

committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in

question. He further submits that the applicant has three previous

criminal antecedents, in all cases compromised has been done between

the parties. He further submits that co-accused persons, namely, Sumit

Singh Thakur, Dumar Randhari and Devendra Rao has been granted bail

by this Court vide order dated 30.06.2025, 07.05.2025 and 05.08.2025

passed in MCRC Nos. 4165/2025, 3535/2025 and 6161/2025,

respectively, further the charge-sheet has been filed and he is in jail since

02.04.2025, the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion.

Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application

and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case but

could not dispute the fact that the applicants have been granted bail by

this Court.

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, period of detention of the applicant since

02.04.2025, the fact that the applicant has three previous criminal

antecedents, in all cases compromised has been done, further

co-accused persons, namely, Sumit Singh Thakur, Dumar Randhari and

Devendra Rao has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated

30.06.2025, 07.05.2025 and 05.08.2025 passed in MCRC Nos.

4165/2025, 3535/2025 and 6161/2025, respectively the charge-sheet

has been filed in the present case, 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. Let the Applicant- Prince Raj @ Janu, involved in Crime No. 503/2025

registered at Police Station Sarkanda District - Bilaspur (C.G.) for the

offence punishable under Sections 309(4), 317(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya

Nyaya Sanhita (for short 'BNS'), be released on bail on his furnishing a

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.

(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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for

necessary information and compliance.

Sd/-

(Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE

Preeti