1 2025:CGHC:23050 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3796 of 2025 Monu @ Prashant Chauhan S/o Shri Kush Chauhan Aged About 23 Years R/o Sanjay Nagar, Champa, P.S. Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station Champa, District – Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ajay Ayachi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Subha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 11.06.2025 1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant arrested in connection with Crime No. 261/2024 registered at Police Station – Champa, District – Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 397 and 34 of the IPC {311, 3(5) of the BNS} and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a report to the concerned Police Station that on the date of incident i.e. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 17.06.2024, the complainant and his helper Ramkishan were present at near Poultry Farm of Dwarika Prasad by parking his vehicle pickup and at that time some unknown persons came there about and they have forcefully carried the complainant and his helper Ramkishan at near Kera Jhariya River and they have pressured upon the complainant and demanded money and thereafter, the complainant has transferred the amount of Rs. 70,000/- on mobile of Santosh Bareth and has also transferred amount of Rs. 40,000/- on mobile of one person by committing marpeet. On the basis of such complaint, the Police registered the crime against the accused persons and during the course of investigation, the Police arrested the applicant. Hence, this application. 3. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 30.04.2025 passed in MCRC No. 3328 of 2025, on the technical ground. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. It has been further submitted that the co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 06.03.2025 passed in MCRC No. 1819/2025. The applicant is in jail since 17.06.2024, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that from the perusal of the case-diary, it transpires that the amount of Rs. 50,000/- has been recovered from the possession of the applicant for which no any explanation has been given by him, 3 and there are 6 criminal antecedents registered against the applicant of similar offence, and he is a habitual offender. As such, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, and from the perusal of the case-diary, it transpires that the amount of Rs. 50,000/- has been recovered from the possession of the applicant for which no any explanation has been given by him, and there are 6 criminal antecedents registered against the applicant of similar offence, and he is a habitual offender, also in light of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, thus, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 8. Accordingly, this Second bail application of applicant – Monu @ Prashant Chauhan involved in Crime No. 261/2024 registered at Police Station – Champa, District – Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 397 and 34 of the IPC {311, 3(5) of the BNS} and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, is rejected at this stage. 9. Needless to say that the concerned trial Court is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 4 10. 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