1 2026:CGHC:1955 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 352 of 2026 Ashfaq Ali @ Astu S/o Rais Ali Aged About 19 Years R/o Village - Kolda Bazar Para Ward No. 1, Chouki Bundeli, Police Station Tendukona District - Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Tendukona, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pawan Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.01.2026 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. 37/2025, registered at Police Station Tendukona, District - Mahasamund (CG) for the offence AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 punishable under Sections 303(2) of BNS. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that on 11.11.2024, the complainant Dani Sahu, along with his brother, had parked his motorcycle at Village Kolda while going to a liquor shop. On returning, the motorcycle was found stolen by unknown persons. Accordingly, Crime No. 37/2025 under Section 303(2) BNS was registered at Police Station Tendukona. During investigation, the applicants Ashfaq Ali @ Astu and Pritam Chakradhari, who were already arrested in another theft case, disclosed in their memorandum statements their involvement in the present motorcycle theft. From the applicants and co-accused, the stolen motorcycle along with 24 other stolen motorcycles and 6 submersible pumps were recovered, leading to registration of multiple cases in different police stations. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submit that present applicant is not named in the FIR, only on the basis of suspicion and false memorandum statement of co- accused, he has been arrested. He also submits that the trial Court failed to appreciate the fact that seizure witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution. The applicant is in jail since 28.03.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail 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 participated in the theft of the complainant’s motorcycle and to be part of an organized vehicle- theft gang, with involvement in multiple similar 10 offences, as such, 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. From perusal of the case diary, it prima facie appears that the applicant the applicant is alleged to have committed theft of the complainant’s motorcycle bearing registration CG 06 GV 5329 on 11.11.2024 from Sukhadabri Main Road, Village Kolda, after it was parked there by the complainant. Initially, the offence was registered against unknown persons at Police Station Tendukona under Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, but during investigation, the applicant, along with co-accused, was implicated on the basis of memorandum statements made after arrest in another theft case. The investigation further reveals that from the applicant and other accused, the stolen motorcycle involved in the present case, along with 24 other stolen motorcycles and 6 submersible pumps, were recovered, indicating his prima facie involvement in the present case. So far as criminal 4 antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has 10 criminal antecedents of identical nature registered against him at different police stations and all cases are of the year 2025, as such, the applicant is a habitual offender, has misused the bail granted to him earlier and a member of an organized vehicle-theft gang, 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 is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant-Ashfaq Ali @ Astu, involved in Crime No. 37/2025, registered at Police Station Tendukona, District - Mahasamund (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2) 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 Akhil