1 2026:CGHC:1191 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 114 of 2026 Rahul Yadav @ Nana S/o Late Prahlad Yadav Aged About 24 Years R/o Near Shiv Mandir, Pandari, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Devendra Nagar, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.01.2026 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. 124/2025, registered at Police Station Devendra Nagar, Raipur, District – Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 25 of Arms Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that a secret information received by the patrolling team of the Police Station concerned that the applicant is threatening the public by showing the knife, and thereafter the Police had rushed to the spot and taken the applicant into custody. Hence, this application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. The applicant is in jail since 10.07.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 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. She further submits that the applicant is said to have threatening the public by showing them knife, and he has a total of 14 criminal antecedents and the only explanation given by the applicant is that out of 14 cases, 4 have been disposed of, but 10 criminal cases are still pending and no plausible explanation has been given for the same, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the fact that the applicant is said to have threatening the public by showing them knife, and he has a total of 14 criminal antecedents and the only explanation given by the applicant is that out of 14 cases, 4 have been disposed of, but 10 criminal cases are still pending and no plausible explanation has been given for the same, which shows that applicant is a habitual offender and he has misused the bail granted to him earlier, and also in light of the judgment rendered by the 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 3 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- Rahul Yadav @ Nana, involved in Crime No. 124/2025, registered at Police Station Devendra Nagar, Raipur, District – Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 25 of Arms Act, is rejected. 8. 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 Rajshekhar