1 2025:CGHC:35825 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5442 of 2025 Hari Vishwakarma S/o Shiv Vishwakarma Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Banhakadi, P.S. Mandir Hasaud, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station Shop Officer, Police Station Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 24.07.2025 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. 129/2025 registered at Police Station- Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 305(a), 331(4), 112(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant lodged a report at the concerned police station alleging that, on the date of 2 the incident, some unknown persons broke the locks of a kirana shop and a shoe shop and committed theft of cash amounting to ₹25,000/- from both shops. Based on this complaint, the police registered a case under Sections 305(a), 331(4), 112(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita against unknown persons. During investigation, on the basis of the memorandum statement, the present applicant was arrested. 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 present applicant has neither entered in the shop nor committed stolen of any article of the complainant’s shop, and the prosecution has not collected the sufficient material from the possession of the applicant regarding theft of the said article. He further submits that police has not seized any said article from the possession of the applicant and he has not committed theft of the seized article and only on the basis of the memorandum statement, the applicant has arrested by police. He further submits that the applicant has only 02 previous criminal antecedents, he is in jail since 11.04.2025 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 allegations against the present applicant are serious in nature, involving theft from two shops after forcibly breaking their locks. It is pointed out that, pursuant to the memorandum statement of the applicant recorded during investigation, his involvement has been 3 clearly established, leading to his arrest. He also submits that the present applicant has 02 criminal antecedents under the similar nature, which shows that the present applicant has habitual offender, 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 is a habitual offender having as many as two prior criminal antecedents registered against him. Further in the instant case, the applicant, along with others, committed theft from the complainant’s shop by breaking the lock and stealing cash amounting to ₹25,000/- from shops. These facts clearly establish a pattern of habitual and deliberate criminal conduct. Considering the fact that the applicant’s habitual nature, previous criminal background, 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 – Hari Vishwakarma, involved in Crime No. 129/2025 registered at Police Station- Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 4 305(a), 331(4), 112(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 alfiza/rahul dewangan