1 2025:CGHC:25947 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4673 of 2025 Manas Paramanik S/o Gopal Paramanik Aged About 36 Years Resident Of Talpara, Lokmanya Tilak Ward House No. 77, Lic Road Near Green City Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station Parpa, District Bastar (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Manish Nigam, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 19.06.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 11/2025, registered at Police Station- Parpa, District Bastar, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 318(4), 338, 336, 340(2), 61 and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant, Dashrath Baghel, lodged a report at the concerned police station alleging RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 that, on the date of the incident, i.e., 27.10.2024, after completing his work, he parked his motorcycle (Splendor) bearing registration No. C.G. 17-KK-4215 and went to purchase vegetables at the market. After some time, he did not find the motorcycle at the spot. It is further alleged that the accused, Pramod Dhruw, who runs a choice centre, had issued a forged R.C. card. Based on the complaint made by the complainant, the police registered a case under Sections 303(2), 318(4), 338, 336, 340(2), 61, and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita against unknown persons. After investigation, the police arrested the present applicant merely on the basis of suspicion and the memorandum statement. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant has neither committed nor participated in any such act, which may amount to any of the offences, mentioned above, he has been arrested only on the basis of suspicious and the memorandum statement. He further submits that the applicant is the Director of R.S. Choice Centre at Dharampura, and as per the guidelines of the State Government, the applicant, along with his employees, has been running his business and discharging his duties honestly and sincerely. The applicant has neither prepared nor issued any forged R.C. book of the stolen vehicle, nor has he committed the theft of the said vehicle, nor any of the offences alleged by the prosecution against him. He further submits that nothing has been seized from the possession of the present applicant. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is 3 concerned, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has 09 criminal antecedents and in those cases also applicant was arrested on the basis of memorandum statement. He also submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 06.02.2025 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, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the present applicant committed theft of motorcycle and had issued a forged R.C. card. She further submits that the present applicant has 09 criminal antecedents which are of the year from 2023 to 2025, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, the material available in the case diary, and the fact that the present applicant committed theft of motorcycle and had issued a forged R.C. card and so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that he has 09 criminal antecedents, and in those cases also, the applicant was arrested on the basis of memorandum statements. However, it is noted that in paragraph 4(a), the applicant himself has stated that he is involved in 09 cases of identical nature, and all these 09 cases pertain to the period from 4 2023 to 2025, which shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble 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, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail, accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Manas Paramanik, involved in Crime No. 11/2025, registered at Police Station- Parpa, District Bastar, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 318(4), 338, 336, 340(2), 61 and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan