1 2026:CGHC:19355 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3589 of 2026 Suman @ Sudesh Panika S/o Bechu Lal Panika Aged About 30 Years R/o Ghutri Dafai Charcha, Police Station - Charcha, District- Korea (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Charcha, District- Korea (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pawan Shrivastava and Mr. Sapnomoy Chattopadhyay, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shailedra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.04.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 201/2025 registered at Police Station – Charcha, District- Korea (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(e) and 310(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, namely Dharam Narayan, lodged a report on 15.10.2025 stating that on the night of 14.10.2025, while he was on duty at his workplace at Charcha East Mine, Level 56 pump, along with his colleagues, they heard sounds of 2 cutting at around 11:00–12:00 midnight. Upon proceeding to the spot, they found that unknown persons had cut approximately 450 meters of copper cable wire using a cutter machine and had taken it away. On the basis of the said complaint, the police registered an FIR for offences punishable under Sections 331(4) and 305(e) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and commenced investigation. During the course of investigation, it was alleged that about 14 persons, including the present applicant, were involved in the commission of the said offence. The police arrested eight co-accused persons, while the present applicant surrendered before the Trial Court and was remanded to judicial custody. After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet has been filed for offences punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(e), and 310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and the matter is presently pending before the Trial Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from the exclusive possession of the applicant, and that his name has been wrongly included in the charge-sheet merely on the allegation that he was seen in the company of the co-accused on the night of the incident. He further submits that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. Nos. 230/2026, 463/2026, 1174/2026, 1473/2026, and 1792/2026 vide order dated 09.01.2026, 14.01.2026, 12.03.2026 respectively, and M.Cr.C. (A) No. 521/2026 have been rejected. It is also submitted that the applicant has 12 previous criminal antecedent, and out of the 12 previous criminal antecedents of the applicant, he has been acquitted in three cases, no action has been taken by the police in one case, and the remaining eight cases are still pending, the same has been explained in paragraph No. 4(a) of this bail application. The applicant has been in custody since 3 12.12.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable time. Accordingly, learned counsel prays that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application. He submits that the applicant has seven previous criminal antecedents, and that the details of the 12 antecedents, as explained by learned counsel for the applicant in paragraph No. 4(a), are vague and unsatisfactory and no details of the same has been given. Hence, it is contended that the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the present applicant has 12 previous criminal antecedents, this Court finds that the details of such antecedents are vague, and details of the same has not been stated properly, despite repeated queries by this Court, the applicant has failed to satisfactorily justify or explain the averments made in paragraph No. 4(a) whereas the co-accused persons who have been granted bail by this Court did not have any previous criminal antecedents, except the applicant, namely, Purushottam @ Golar Basar, has four previous criminal antecedents, and the other applicant, namely, Ayodhya Basor has one previous criminal antecedent, this Court is of the view that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant- Suman @ Sudesh Panika, involved in Crime No. 201/2025 registered at Police Station – 4 Charcha, District- Korea (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(e) and 310(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude 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 Preeti