[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Ankit Sharma vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 12 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:11959
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2336 of 2026
Ankit Sharma S/o Shri Surendra Sharma Aged About 26 Years R/o F- 62,
Garden Reach Road, Garden Reach, Kolkata, West Bengal,
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
Gudhiyari, District - Raipur (C.G.)
---- Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Rishabh Dev Singh, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Digitally
RAJSHEKHAR signed by
Order on Board
SONI RAJSHEKHAR
SONI
12.03.2026
1.
The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section
483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of
regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.
327/2025, registered at Police Station - Gudhiyari, District - Raipur
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 317(2),
317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of the BNS.
2. The case of the prosecution, is that the complainant alleged that his
mobile phone was stolen and subsequently an amount of Rs. 99,000/-
was withdrawn in two installments through PhonePe. During the course
of investigation, certain co-accused persons were arrested and on the
basis of their memorandum statements, the applicant was implicated
alleging that he had provided a "mule account" for transfer of the stolen
amount. On the basis of the memorandums statement of the applicant,
one Vivo mobile phone, One Redmi mobile phone and Rs. 10,000/-
cash were seized. Hence, this application.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and the co-
accused persons have been granted bail by this Court in MCRC Nos.
10519/2025 and 10116/2025 on 05.02.2026. It is further submitted that
the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail
since 22.07.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its
conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail
application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in this
case. It is further submitted that the applicant had provided a "mule
account" to the co-accused for transfer of the stolen amount, and on
the basis of his memorandums statement, one Vivo mobile phone, One
Redmi mobile phone and Rs. 10,000/- cash were seized, therefore, he
is not entitled for grant of bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the
documents available on record.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the
fact that the co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court
in MCRC Nos. 10519/2025 and 10116/2025 on 05.02.2026, charge-
sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since
22.07.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am
inclined to allow this application.
7. Let applicant, Ankit Sharma, involved in Crime No. 327/2025,
registered at Police Station - Gudhiyari, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111
and 3(5) of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal
bond with two local 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
concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Rajshekhar
