1 2025:CGHC:56950 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9400 of 2025 Suresh Sonjhara S/o Late Chamanlal Sonjhara Aged About 46 Years R/o New Shubhash Nagar, Thana- Tikrapara, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO, Thana- Mujgahan, District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh … Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Samir Singh, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 24.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS in connection with Crime No. 87/2025, registered at Police Station – Mujgahan, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305 & 111 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The Prosecution case in brief is that on 27.04.2025 the Complainant namely Nandan Das has lodged the report that, on 23rd of April, 2025, some unknown persons have entered into his VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.11.25 17:44:33 +0530 2 house and theft gold ornaments amounting Rs. 45,000/-, thereafter report has been lodged and police has been arrested the applicant for the alleged commission of offence. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the only allegation against the applicant is that he had purchased some ornaments; however, he has been falsely implicated despite not having committed any theft from the complainant. It is further submitted that the applicant has been arrayed as an accused solely on the basis of the memorandum of the co-accused, though such a memorandum cannot be legally used as evidence against him. The applicant is in jail since 21.08.2025, therefore, learned counsel prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that on 27.04.2025 the Complainant namely Nandan Das has lodged the report that, on 23rd of April, 2025, some unknown persons have entered into his house and theft gold ornaments amounting Rs. 45,000/-. On his report, an FIR was registered at Police Station concerned against the applicant and other co-accused, and the applicant is said to have purchased the stolen articles including such gold ornaments. The applicant has 05 criminal antecedents of a similar nature including the present one, for which the applicant has preferred bail 3 applications which have been listed today in MCRC Nos. 9487/2025, 9529/2025, 9525/2025 and 9530/2025. Considering the gravity of the offence and the applicant’s criminal history which shows that he is a habitual offender, therefore, applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is evident from the case diary that on 27.04.2025 the Complainant namely Nandan Das has lodged the report that, on 23rd of April, 2025, some unknown persons have entered into his house and theft gold ornaments amounting Rs. 45,000/-. On his report, an FIR was registered at Police Station concerned against the applicant and other co-accused persons. It is alleged that the applicant is said to have purchased the stolen articles including such gold ornaments. Furthermore, the applicant has 05 criminal antecedents of a similar nature including the present one, for which the applicant has preferred bail applications which have been listed and being rejected today in MCRC Nos. 9487/2025, 9529/2025, 9525/2025 and 9530/2025. In view of the seriousness of the offence, the organized nature of the crime, and the applicant’s criminal history which shows that he is a habitual offender, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on regular bail. 4 7. Accordingly, the bail application filed by the applicant/accused – Suresh Sonjhara involved in Crime No. 87/2025, registered at Police Station – Mujgahan, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305 & 111 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav