-1- 2025:CGHC:252 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8858 of 2024 Vinod Kumar Ravidas S/o Gokul Ravidas Aged About 21 Years R/o Basti Baradwar P.S. And Tahsil Baradwar, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Baradwar, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Abhishek Bhardwaj, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar, Advocate For State : Mr. Ritesh Giri, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 02/01/2025 1. Applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of regular bail as he was arrested in connection with Crime No.88 of 2023 registered at Police Station –Baradwar, District- Sakti (CG) for offence punishable under Sections 457, 380, 413, 201, 34 of IPC. 2. This is the third bail application on behalf of the applicant. His first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on 12.12.2023 with liberty to repeat the prayer after examination of seizure and Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA -2- memorandum witnesses and his second bail application was dismissed for want of prosecution on 02.08.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this third bail application is filed on the ground of delay in trial. Applicant is in jail since 06.08.2023, hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. When this Court posed a question to learned counsel for the applicant with regard to stage of trial as on date, after verifying the position, he fairly submits that case is fixed today for recording the statement of accused and defence witness. 5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the submission of learned counsel for the applicant and submits that applicant is a habitual offender and there are ten other offences of similar nature registered against him. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Considering the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel for the State and further considering the stage of trial as submitted by learned counsel for the applicant, I do not find present to be a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail. 8. The application is accordingly rejected. Sd/---/-/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen