1 2026:CGHC:21984 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4368 of 2026 Rajendra Khairwar @ Dilip @ Vishwanath S/o Rajbali Khairwar Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Udaypur Police Station Ramkanda District Garhwa (Jharkhand) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Samripath, District – Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Amarnath Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Government Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 11.05.2026 1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant arrested in connection with Crime No. 11/2015 registered at Police Station – Samripath, District – Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 4(B) of Explosive Substance Act and 8(1)(3)(5) of Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act. 2. Earlier the first bail application of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 07.08.2025 passed in MCRC No.4961/2025, on merits. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 18.03.2015 received information from an informer that unknown Naxalites have buried a Tiffin bomb from Sabag to Chunchuna Pundag on the route used by the police and CRPF forces with the intention of causing harm to the RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 lives and property of the police personal and villagers and government property. Based on the above information, the police reached a place called Kurga Ama before the incident site Pachpedi village and carefully condoned off the area and searched it with the help of a sniffer dog. When the sniffer dog repeatedly marked the same place, the BDS team identified the Tiffin bomb and detonator wire, when they could not understand its mechanism, the BDS team advised to defuse the IED on the spot and the IED was defused on the spot by the BDS team. Crime was registered against unknown person at Police Station concerned and investigation was taken up against the applicant and charge sheet was filed. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that so far as the status of the trial is concerned, out of 22 prosecution witnesses, only 1 witness has been examined before the trial Court. It is submitted that there are 36 criminal antecedents of the applicant. It is submitted that the applicant is in jail since 07.04.2025, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail, and he also prays that the trial be expedited. 5. Learned State opposes the bail application, stating that the applicant is said to be involved in naxalite activities and the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits vide order dated 07.08.2025 passed in MCRC No.4961/2025, further the fact that there are a total of 36 criminal antecedents registered against the applicant, out of which 06 antecedents are registered against him 3 within District – Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) and approximately 30 cases are registered in District – Garwaha (Jharkhand), which goes to show that he is a habitual offender. Therefore, this bail application is liable to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that so far as the status of the trial is concerned, out of 22 prosecution witnesses, only 1 witness has been examined before the trial Court, but considering the nature of allegations leveled against the applicant that the applicant is said to be involved in naxalite activities and the first bail application of the applicant was aleady rejected on merits vide order dated 07.08.2025 passed in MCRC No.4961/2025, further the fact that there are a total of 36 criminal antecedents registered against the applicant, out of which 06 antecedents are registered against him within District – Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) and approximately 30 cases are registered in District – Garwaha (Jharkhand), which goes to show that he is a habitual offender, thus, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 8. 8. Accordingly, this second bail application of applicant – Rajendra Khairwar @ Dilip @ Vishwanath, involved in Crime No. 11/2015 registered at Police Station – Samripath, District – Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 4(B) of Explosive Substance Act and 8(1)(3)(5) of Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, is rejected at this stage. 4 9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 10. 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 Rajshekhar