1 2025:CGHC:60608 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10311 of 2025 Ashfaq Ali @ Astu S/o Rais Ali Aged About 19 Years R/o Village - Kolda Bazar Para Ward No. 01, Chouki Bundeli, Police Station Tendukona District - Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Mahasamund, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Pawan Kesharwani, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Soumya Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.12.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 64/2025, registered at Police Station Mahasamund, District – Mahasamund (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 112(1), 313 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, on 17.02.2025, the complainant Sher Mohammad appeared before the police station and gave oral information that he is a resident of Ward No. 05 Sanjay Nagar Mahasamund and is an auto driver. On 15.02.2025 at about 08:00 PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.12.15 18:52:20 +0530 2 in the morning, he reached Mahasamund bus stand from his house on his motorcycle HF Deluxe No. CG 06 GJ 9071, parked the motorcycle in the passenger waiting room of the bus stand Mahasamund, locked it and went to Khallari to drive the auto from the bus. When he returned to Mahasamund bus stand at about 03:00 in the afternoon, his motorcycle HF Deluxe No. CG 06 GJ 9071 was not there where he had parked it. He searched for the address nearby but could not find it. His motorcycle HF. Deluxe No. CG 06 GJ 9071 was stolen by some unknown person. On the basis of the complaint an FIR has been registered crime no. 64/2025 against unknown persons. Further alleged that during the course of investigation, police station Mahasamund received an information from the informer that near khaira Chowk some persons trying to sell old vehicle and after receiving the same information reached the spot and during investigation the accused persons disclose their names and they disclosed that apart from the motorcycle attached in the said crime, 24 other stolen motorcycles and 6 submersible pumps have been stolen. On the basis of their memorandum statement police seized 25 motor cycle and 6 submersible pumps from the instance of accused persons. After investigation, final report was submitted before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Mahasamund, District-Mahasamund (C.G.). 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the applicant has no direct or indirect involvement in the alleged crime. The name of the applicant is not mentioned in the FIR, and only on the basis of 3 suspicion and a false memorandum statement of the accused in Crime No. 64/2025, the present applicant has been implicated and arrested. He also submits that the learned trial Court failed to appreciate the fact that the memorandum and seizure witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution. He further submits that the learned trial Court failed to appreciate, while considering the bail application, that the bail applications of the other five co- accused persons on similar allegations have already been allowed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahasamund. He submits that the applicant is a labourer and earns his livelihood through manual work to support himself and his family. His continued detention in jail is causing severe economic, mental, and physical hardship to his dependent family members. He submits that the present applicant has been in jail since 26.03.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. He submits that the present applicant has 10 criminal antecedents of the similar nature, which shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender, therefore, he is not entitled for grant regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case also 4 considering the fact that the present applicant has 10 criminal antecedents of the similar nature, which shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble 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 it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Ashfaq Ali @ Astu, involved in Crime No. 64/2025, registered at Police Station Mahasamund, District – Mahasamund (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 112(1), 313 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti