1 2025:CGHC:12575 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2070 of 2025 1. Siddharth Singh @ Netu @ Siddhu S/o Shri Rakesh Singh Aged About 24 Years R/o Ramarepur, Awajapur, P.S. - Dhanapur, District - Chandauli Uttar Pradesh Presently R/o Vipra Nagar, Behind H.R. Tower, Raipura, P.S. - D.D. Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2. Suraj Singh @ Ashutosh S/o Shri Rakesh Singh Aged About 20 Years R/o Ramarepur, Awajapur, P.S. - Dhanapur, District - Chandauli Uttar Pradesh Presently R/o Vipra Nagar, Behind H.R. Tower, Raipura, P.S. - D.D. Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station D.D. Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.03.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS in connection with Crime No. 312/2024, ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.03.18 10:46:08 +0530 2 registered at Police Station D.D. Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305, 3(5) and 317(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution's case is that a complaint was filed by Jyoti Prabha against unknown persons, alleging that on 10.07.2024, at approximately 5:00 PM, she left her home with her family to attend a wedding out of town. On 17.07.2024, at around 10:30 PM, her neighbor, Sushma Rawat, informed her over the phone that the lights in her house were on and that someone had broken in and committed theft. Upon returning the next day, Jyoti Prabha discovered that gold and silver ornaments, along with Rs. 4,500/- in cash, had been stolen, totaling Rs. 80,000/-. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the true facts of the case are that the applicants' sister filed an application under Section 100 of the BNSS, requesting the production of her brothers/applicants before the Magistrate, as they were allegedly illegally detained by the police at D.D. Nagar police station from 30.07.2024, to 02.08.2024. She also requested the production of CCTV footage from the said police station. Furthermore, she alleged in her application that the police ofÏcials had demanded an illegal gratification of Rs. 1,00,000/- for their release. A copy of the application, along with the order, is annexed herewith as Annexure A/2. He also submits that due to the aforementioned incident, the present applicants were 3 made accused by recording a false memorandum in all pending theft cases at the police station. The present applicants were implicated solely based on the memorandum statement given, and there was no seizure of stolen items from them. He also submits that the applicants are young men aged 24 and 20 years, respectively, and have been falsely implicated by the police. They have been in jail since 22.08.2024. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicants have 16 criminal antecedents out of which 14 cases are under the similar nature, which shows that the present applicants are habitual offenders, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. From perusal of the case diary, it transpires that the applicants have 16 criminal antecedents out of which 14 cases are under the similar nature, which shows that the present applicants are habitual offenders, hence it does not appear to be proper case to grant benefit of bail to the applicants. 7. Therefore, the bail application filed by the applicants/accused – Siddharth Singh @ Netu @ Siddhu and Suraj Singh @ Ashutosh, involved in Crime No. 312/2024, registered at Police Station D.D. Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305, 3(5) and 317(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya 4 Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned, is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. OfÏce 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 Abhishek