1 2025:CGHC:28187 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4898 of 2025 1 - Khirod Dadsena S/o Shri Arjun Dadsena Aged About 40 Years R/o Village - Rikokala, Thana - Rajadevri Distt. - Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 2 - Kirtan Dadsena S/o Shri Nazaru Dadsena Aged About 49 Years R/o Village - Rikokala, Thana - Rajadevri Distt. - Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Rajadevri, Distt. - Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 26.06.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 in connection with Crime No. 16/2025, registered at Police Station Rajadevri, Distt. - Balodabazar-Bhatapara (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 305, 317, 331(4), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that on 20.03.2025, the complainant, Sukalu Ram Diwan, resident of Rikokala, lodged a report at Rajadeveri Police Station alleging that on 17.03.2025, a black-purple colored Hero HF Deluxe motorcycle, vehicle No. CG/06/3573, was stolen from his house by an unknown person. Despite searching for the motorcycle, it could not be found, and a case was registered against unknown accused persons and taken up for investigation. During the investigation, the accused persons were taken into custody and interrogated, and their statements were recorded. Based on the memorandum statement of applicant No.1 Khirod Dadsena, the stolen motorcycle was recovered. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submit that the investigation is complete and the charge sheet has been filed. Notably, the prosecution agency has not collected any direct evidence against the applicants, except for the memorandum recorded in another case. However, this memorandum cannot be legally used in the present case, as it forms the basis for implicating the applicants in five different 3 cases, though in the said five cases, applicants have already been granted bail by the trial Court and Sessions Court, the said fact is also mentioned in para 4(a) of the bail application. The bail application in the present case was rejected solely on the ground that the applicants are alleged to have been involved in the theft of 17 other motorcycles. The applicants are in jail since 20.03.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicants are alleged to have stolen the motorcycle of complainant, which was also recovered as per memorandum statement of applicant No.1, further in relation to the present case, applicant have committed theft of 17 other motorcycles from various places and sold them, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are cornered, applicants have five criminal antecedents of identical nature, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the fact that the involvement of applicants were found in theft of 4 motorcycle of the complainant, which was recovered as per memorandum statement of applicant No.1, the case diary further reveals that the accused persons were also involved in theft of 17 other motorcycles from various places and sold them, so far as criminal antecedents of applicants are concerned, applicants have five criminal antecedents of identical nature, though he has been granted bail in all the said five cases by the trial Court, but accused persons appear to be habitual offenders, as such, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicants-Khirod Dadsena and Kirtan Dadsena involved in Crime No. 16/2025, registered at Police Station Rajadevri, Distt. - Balodabazar-Bhatapara (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 305, 317, 331(4), 3(5) of BNS, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. 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 Akhil