1 2025:CGHC:35824 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5611 of 2025 1 - Gulshan Patel @ Jhakki S/o Late Radhelal Patel Aged About 21 Years R/o Bhalukonha, P.S. Lawan, District Balodabazar Chhattisgarh 2 - Nandkumar Yadav @ Vikas S/o Late Shambhu Yadav Aged About 21 Years R/o Tulsi Rawanbhatha Chowk, P.S. Mandir Hasaud, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 24.07.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS 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), 2 112(2), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, the complainant has lodged a report to the concerned police Station, alleging that on the date of incident, the unknown persons have entered in kirana shop and shoe shop by breaking lock and committed theft of cash amount of Rs. 25,000/- from kirana shop and shoe shop and on the basis of complaint made by the complainant, the police has registered the case under section 305(a), 331(4), 112(2), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita against the unknown persons and after the investigation, the police has arrested the present applicants on the memorandum statement. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the alleged crime, they have not committed any offence as alleged against them. There is no ingredient of offence punishable under section 305(a), 331(4), 112(2), 3(5) of the BNS against the present applicants. Further, the present applicants have neither entered in the shop nor committed theft of any article of the complainant's shop, and the prosecution has not collected the sufficient material from the possession of the applicants regarding theft of the said article. Also, the police has not seized any said article from the applicants and they have not committed theft of the seized article and only on the basis of memorandum statement, the applicants have arrested by police. Lastly, the applicants are languishing in jail since 11.04.2025 and though the 3 charge-sheet has been filed, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the complainant has registered the case against the applicants for theft in his shops and during investigation, the applicants were arrested along with other co- accused persons on the basis of memorandum statement and have confessed that the applicants along with other co-accused committed theft of Rs.25,000/- along with other articles from the shop of the complainant and distributed the same among themselves. Further, the applicants Gulshan Patel @ Jhakki and Nandkumar Yadav @ Vikas have three pervious criminal antecedents each registered against them for similar nature of offence, which itself shows that they are habitual offenders, as such, their bail application is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the allegations levelled against the applicants and submission made by learned State counsel and the fact that the applicants along with other co-accused persons were arrested on the basis of complaint made by the complainant and during investigation, they have confessed to have committed theft of Rs.25,000/- and other articles from the shop of the complainant and distributed the same among themselves and further, the applicants have three previous criminal antecedents each for similar nature of 4 offence, which shows that applicants are habitual offenders and have misused the bail granted to them earlier 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, though the charge-sheet has been filed and applicants are languishing in jail since 11.04.2025, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicants on regular bail. 7. Therefore, the bail application filed by the applicants/accused – Gulshan Patel @ Jhakki and Nandkumar Yadav @ Vikas involved in 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), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned, is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. sd/-- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Alfiza / Manpreet