1 2025:CGHC:6536 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1039 of 2025 Dhirendra Vaishnav @ Tinku S/o Fuldas Vaishnav Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Bahtarai Bhukamp Atal Awas Bilsapur Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer Police Station Sarkanda District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ajay Kumar Chandra, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sakib Ahmed, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 05.02.2025 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. 1437/2024, registered at Police Station- Sarkanda District - Bilaspur, (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 188 and 233 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 14 & 15 of Chhattisgarh State Security Act, 1990. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, in Case No. 29/2023, vide order dated 04-04-2024 was issued under Sections 3-A, 3-B, 5-A, and 5-B of the Chhattisgarh Vishesh Jan Suraksha Adhiniyam, 2005, prohibiting the applicant from entering the revenue districts of Janjgir-Champa, Korba, Mungeli, and Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi for RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.02.06 16:56:11 +0530 2 a period of six months. However, it is alleged that between 07-07- 2024 and 03-09-2024, the applicant entered these districts and committed two offences i.e. at Police Station Sarkanda, registered as Crime No. 753/2024, under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), and 119(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and at Police Station Janjgir, registered as Crime Nos. 677/2024 and 679/2024, under Section 303(2) of the BNS. Consequently, a charge sheet has been filed against the applicant for the aforementioned offences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case and he has neither committed nor participated in any such act, which may amount to any of the offences, mentioned above. He further submits that besides the above, the evidence collected by the prosecution are also not prima facie sufÏcient to hold the applicant guilty of the aforesaid offences. He also submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.01.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 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 also submits that the present applicant has 22 criminal antecedents from the years 2015 to 2024, including 02 cases from 2024 which shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender. As such, 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 also considering the fact that the applicant has 22 criminal antecedents from the years 2015 to 2024, including 02 cases from 2024, 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 – Dhirendra Vaishnav @ Tinku, involved in Crime No. 1437/2024, registered at Police Station- Sarkanda District - Bilaspur, (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 188 and 233 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 14 & 15 of Chhattisgarh State Security Act, 1990, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 8. OfÏce 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 Rahul Dewangan