1 2025:CGHC:59204 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9997 of 2025 Rafik Khan @ Bhuru S/o Habib Khan Aged About 25 Years R/o Near Shakti Mata Mandir, P.S. Khamhardih, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Khamhardih, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Bharat Lal Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 05.12.2025 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. 72/2025, registered at Police Station Khamhardih, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 3(5) of RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, based on a report lodged by the complainant, Police Station Khamhardih, Raipur registered Crime No. 72/2025. The allegation against the applicant/accused is that he verbally abused the complainant, threatened to kill him, and, with common intention, assaulted him with fists and a sharp iron khukhri, causing simple injuries. The accused was allegedly in possession of an illegal knife without any valid licence and used it during the assault. The knife was recovered at the instance of the accused during investigation. After completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the applicant/accused and the co-accused under the relevant sections of the BNS and the Arms Act and was subsequently arrested. 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 parties reside in the same locality and a minor dispute arose between them over money for consuming liquor. The applicant neither assaulted the injured nor committed any of the offences alleged by the prosecution. The injuries sustained by the complainant are simple in nature. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the case merely on the basis of suspicion and unfounded allegations. So far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, the applicant has a criminal history of nine prior cases registered in the same police station. The 3 applicant is in jail since 25.03.2025 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, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant abused and threatened the complainant, and allegedly assaulted him with fists and a sharp weapon (khukhri/knife), causing simple injuries, further he is also accused of possessing and using an illegal knife without any valid licence during the incident and the knife used in the incident was also recovered at the instance of the applicant. He also submits that the applicant has nine prior cases registered in the same police station, indicating that the applicant is a habitual offender, 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 and the fact that the applicant allegedly assaulted the injured with fists and a sharp weapon (khukhri/knife) and the knife used in the incident was recovered at the instance of applicant, though the injuries sustained by the complainant is simple in nature, but considering the fact that the applicant has nine prior cases registered in the 4 same police station, indicating habitual criminal behaviour 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, 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 - Rafik Khan @ Bhuru, involved in Crime No. 72/2025, registered at Police Station Khamhardih, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 3(5) of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 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 Rahul Dewangan