1 2025:CGHC:56115 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9267 of 2025 Ashok Chandravanshi @ Mussu S/o Dhaniram Aged About 26 Years R/o Bhatapara, Kurud, P.S. Mandir Hasod, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Mandir Hasod, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Gulabani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 18.11.2025 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. 307/2025, registered at Police Station Mandir Hasod, District Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 under Sections 331(4), 305, 3(5) of BNS. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant reported that between the night of 09.07.2025 and the morning of 10.07.2025, unknown persons broke the lock of his bedroom and dressing unit, opened the cupboard locker using its key, and stole gold ornaments, silver anklets, two mobile phones, and Rs.9,00,000/- in cash, totaling Rs.9,42,000/-. During investigation, on the basis of the applicant/accused’s memorandum statement, an amount of Rs.8,50,000/-, part of the stolen property, was recovered from his house. Hence, the applicant has been implicated for committing the theft and charged under Sections 305, 331(4), and 3(5) BNS. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent, only on the basis of mere suspicion, present applicant has been implicated in the case. He further submits that no seizure of any incriminating article has been made from the possession of the applicant and FIR was lodged after 15 days of the incidence, which the prosecution has not explained. The applicant is in jail since 24.07.2025, so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has two criminal antecedents of the years 2023 and 2024 of identical nature, further 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 3 application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant is alleged to have committed theft in the house of the complainant by breaking the locks of the complainant’s bedroom and cupboard and stealing ornaments, mobile phones, and cash, from his possession Rs.8,50,000/- of the stolen amount has been recovered during investigation, further the applicant has three criminal antecedents, out of which, two cases are of identical nature and one case is under the Excise act, therefore, the applicant is a habitual offender and 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 is alleged to have committed house theft by breaking the locks of the complainant’s bedroom and cupboard and stealing valuables and cash, from which an amount of Rs.8,50,000/- was recovered from his possession during investigation, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has three criminal antecedents, out of which, two cases are of the years 2023 and 2024 of identical nature and one case is under the Excise act, as such, the applicant is a habitual offender and also in light of the judgment rendered by the 4 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-Ashok Chandravanshi @ Mussu, involved in Crime No. 307/2025, registered at Police Station Mandir Hasod, District Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305, 3(5) of 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 Rajshekhar