1 2025:CGHC:56799 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8843 of 2025 Vinay Prakash Kujur S/o Shri Dharmu Kujur Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Gajabhdi, Thana Savargaon, District Gadchirouli (Maharashtra) ... Applicant versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Aundhi, District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh ---Respondent For Applicant : Shri Aniruddha Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Swajeet Singh Ubeja, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21/11/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.26/2025 registered at Police Station Aundhi, District Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3) of BNS, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Nagesh Arya, had purchased a Honda Shine bearing registration CG-19-BK-6148 from Punam Chand Jain about three years ago. On February 10, 2025, at about 4:30 P.M., he left home for Morchul Market with his motorcycle GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.11.24 11:03:41 +0530 2 Shine bearing registration. No. CG 19-BK-6148. He parked it on the roadside and went to buy some goods. When he returned at about 5:30 p.m., the motorcycle was missing. On the basis of said report that an unknown thief had stolen his motorcycle, a case was registered at Aundhi Police Station. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case, he has neither committed any theft nor he was involved in the aforesaid offence of theft. He would submit that the name of the applicant is not mentioned in the FIR and he was made an accused on the basis of the doubt. He would submit that the specific allegation against the applicant is that he has prepared forged registration cards of stolen motorcycles however, no cogent or reliable evidence has been produced by the prosecution to substantiate such allegation. He would submit that the applicant has been arrested on 28.05.2025 on the basis of the memorandum of the co-accused and he has been implicated in four cases of the same nature though he did not have any previous criminal antecedent of the theft. He would submit that charge sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and he would submit that charge sheet has been filed before the competent court. He would submit that the applicant has four cases of similar nature and three of them pertains to 2025 whereas one pertains to year 2024 and he is again indulged in commission of theft of a motorcycle which was recovered from him, as such he is a habitual offender, therefore he is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, further the fact that applicant has four cases of similar nature and three of them pertains to 2025 whereas one pertains to year 2024 and he is again indulged in commission of theft of a motorcycle which was recovered from him, as such he is a habitual offender, further he has misused the bail granted to him earlier and 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, therefore this Court is of the opinion that this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant Vinay Prakash Kujur involved in Crime No.26/2025 registered at Police Station Aundhi, District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3) of BNS, 2023, is rejected. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri