1 2025:CGHC:30590 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5176 of 2025 J Pawan Urf Brusali S/o J Bade Sahab Aged About 20 Years R/o- Sundar Nagar Camp - 01, Bhilai Police Station Chhawani, District Durg (C.G.) (Details Of The Applicant Is Properly Not Mentioned In The Cause Title Of Impugned Sheet) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sho Police Station Chhawani, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Aman Tamrakar holding the brief of Mr. Avinash chand Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 04.07.2025 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. 36/2025, registered at Police Station Chhawani, District - Durg (CG) for the offence punishable under Section 309(4), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant lodged a AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 report alleging that on January 18, 2025, at around 10:30 P.M. he was heading to watch a Jasgeet program at Murkatta School in Bhilai. As he was walking near Sunder Tenth House, the present applicant and Sheikh Arman arrived on a Honda Sign motorcycle bearing registration No. CG 07 LY 2850. They stopped their vehicle and approached him. The applicant asked him how much money he had, searched his pockets, and took out his mobile phone (Vivo Y27) with an Airtel SIM (number 860216xxxx) and IMEI number 8689050607xxxxx. The complainant alleged that the stolen items were worth approximately Rs.15,000, and the accused fled the scene. The matter was reported to the police, who registered the offense and arrested the applicant. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that seizure of Rs.12,000/- has been made from present applicant. He further submits that the injuries sustained by the applicant are simple in nature, applicant is a young college going student, only on account of previous animosity, the present applicant has been implicated in the case. He also submits that one of the identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Sheikh Arman has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 13.05.2025 in MCRC No.3719/2025, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has 13 criminal antecedents, out of which, one case has already been disposed of and in one 3 case applicant has already been acquitted. The applicant is in jail since 19.01.2025 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 filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons have robbed the complainant took his mobile phone (Vivo Y27) and other items including case, total worth approximately Rs.15,000/-, further there is seizure of Rs.12,000/- has been made from the applicant and he has 13 criminal antecedents from the years 2021 to 2024, therefore, he is 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 applicant is alleged to have robbed the complainant took his mobile phone (Vivo Y27) and other items including case, total worth approximately Rs.15,000/- in collusion with other co- accused persons, seizure of Rs.12,000/- has been made from the applicant, so far as co-accused, who has granted bail by this Court is concerned, the case of present applicant is distinguishable from him as he has only 1 criminal antecedent against him, whereas, present applicant has 13 criminal 4 antecedents, out of which 11 cases are pending against him, as such, applicant is a habitual offender and the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, 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, this Court is of the opinion that is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant-J Pawan Urf Brusali involved in Crime No. 36/2025, registered at Police Station Chhawani, District - Durg (CG) for the offence punishable under Section 309(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