Grant of regular bail is permissible when the primary witness fails to support the prosecution's case, the charge-sheet is filed, and the accused has no prior criminal antecedents, despite the recovery of some stolen property.

Order on Board

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. 0845/2025 registered at Police Station- Ambikapur District Sarguja, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant namely Vikrant Jayaswal lodged a written report at Police Station Ambikapur, District Sarguja, on 06.11.2025 alleging therein that on 05.11.2025 at about 09:30 PM, after closing his mobile shop, he went to his house and on the next day, upon returning to the shop, he found that unknown persons had committed theft of about 107 costly mobile phones from the shop. During the course of investigation, the present applicant was implicated in the alleged offence and was arrested on 16.11.2025 in connection with Crime No. 0845/2025 for the offence of theft. Hence, the present bail application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. It is further submitted that there is no direct allegation against the present applicant and only vague allegations have been levelled against him. He further submits that, looking to the material available on record, no prima facie case is made out against the present applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. It is also submitted that there are total six accused persons involved in the alleged offence including the present applicant, out of whom five accused persons are still absconding and the present applicant is the only accused who has been arrested. He further submits that the statement of P.W.-1 namely Vikrant Jaiswal has already been recorded before the learned Trial Court and he has not supported the case of the prosecution. He further submits that the present applicant has no previous criminal antecedent, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, he is in jail since 16.11.2025 and 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 submitted before the competent Court. She further submits that the present applicant is involved in a serious offence of theft wherein a total of 107 costly mobile phones were stolen from the shop of the complainant. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation, 03 stolen mobile phones have been seized from the possession of the present applicant, which clearly connects him with the commission of the alleged offence. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the offence and the recovery effected from the applicant, the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.

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

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations levelled against the present applicant, the fact that a total of 107 mobile phones were allegedly stolen from the shop of the complainant and 03 mobile phones have been seized from the possession of the present applicant, as well as con