1 2025:CGHC:36102 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5815 of 2025 Veer Abhimanyu @ Manna S/o Bhagirathi Devdas Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Banjari Nagar, Near Kendriya Vidhyalaya, D.D. Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station D.D. Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Bharat Lal Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 25.07.2025 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. 464/2024, registered at Police Station D.D. Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant, Ashish Thakur, filed a report stating that on December 4, 2024, at around AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 3:30 PM, he had locked his house and gone to Bal Gopal Hospital in Raipur. When he returned home on December 5, 2024, at around 1:30 PM, he opened the main gate and entered his house, only to find that the door's latch was broken, and the room's almirah was open. The contents of the wooden almirah were scattered all over the room. Upon checking the almirah, he discovered that 2 gold chains, 2 gold necklaces, 4 gold rings, 2 pairs of gold earrings, 4 gold pendants, 1 gold coin, a silver waistband, 10 pairs of silver anklets, silver bowls and spoons, and a certain amount of cash were missing, which led to the registration of aforesaid offence. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submit that the present applicant has neither entered the house nor committed theft of any article from the complainant's house, and the prosecution has not collected sufficient material from the possession of the applicant regarding the theft of the said articles. He also submits that the police have not seized any of the said articles from the applicant, and he has not committed theft of the seized articles. The applicant has been arrested by the police solely on the basis of the memorandum of statement. The applicant is in jail since 25.01.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 3 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 in collusion with other co-accused persons is alleged to have committed theft in the house of complainant, they allegedly stolen 2 gold chains, 2 gold necklaces, 4 gold rings, 2 pairs of gold earrings, 4 gold pendants, 1 gold coin, a silver waistband, 10 pairs of silver anklets, silver bowls and spoons, and a certain amount of cash, further there is recovery of Rs.5,000/- from the possession of present applicant, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has six criminal antecedents, out of which, one is under the Arms Act and other five case are of similar nature, 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, it prima facie appears that the applicant is involved in a theft case, the applicant is alleged to have committed theft in the house of complainant and stolen 2 gold chains, 2 gold necklaces, 4 gold rings, 2 pairs of gold earrings, 4 gold pendants, 1 gold coin, a silver waistband, 10 pairs of silver anklets, silver bowls and spoons, and a certain amount of cash, further there is recovery of 4 Rs.5,000/- from the possession of present applicant, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has six criminal antecedents, out of which, one is under the Arms Act and other five case are of similar nature, as such, the applicant is a habitual offender 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-Veer Abhimanyu @ Manna, involved in Crime No. 464/2024, registered at Police Station D.D. Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and concluded 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