1 2026:CGHC:25426 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5461 of 2026 1 - Roshan Ratre S/o Shri Malik Ram Ratre Aged About 21 Years R/o Bajranj Chowk Boriya Kala, Police Station- Mujgahan District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Kamal Jangde S/o Derharam Jangde Aged About 43 Years R/o Satnami Para, Police Station- Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Civil Lines Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anmol Gupta, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22.06.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 517/2025 registered at Police Station - Civil Line Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2), VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.06.23 11:27:02 +0530 2 317(2) & 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant lodged an FIR against the unknown persons regarding the theft of his Activa scooty parked at before redcross office multilevel parking and allegation against the present applicants is that the Civil Lines Raipur Police intercepted the applicants upon the disclosure/memorandum statement of, it was revealed that the applicants are involved into theft of Activa since last 2 years at different places and have committed theft of almost 36 two wheelers. On the basis of the above information FIR(s) has been registered against the applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the FIR does not disclose the names of the applicants and is, in fact, an unnamed FIR. The implication of the applicants is based primarily on their memorandum statements, which by themselves do not constitute sufficient material to establish their involvement in the alleged offence. Learned counsel further submits that the maximum punishment prescribed for the alleged offence is imprisonment up to three years or fine, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. It is also submitted that the applicants have been in judicial custody since 24.01.2026, the investigation has been completed, and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. Therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicants is required. In such circumstances, continued detention of the applicants is unwarranted, and they deserve to be enlarged on bail. The applicants reserve their right to 3 raise additional grounds at the time of hearing. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case. It is further submitted that both the applicants have multiple criminal antecedents of a similar nature. Applicant No. 1, Roshan Ratre, and Applicant No. 2, Kamal Jangde, are involved in Crime Nos. 311/2025, 07/2026, 575/2025, 507/2025 and 499/2025 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Raipur, as well as Crime No. 06/2026 registered at Police Station Gole Bazar, District Raipur, for offences punishable under Sections 303(2), 317(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Learned State Counsel submits that the applicants are habitual offenders and their repeated involvement in similar offences disentitle them from the discretionary relief of bail. It is further submitted that the bail application of one of the co-accused has already been rejected by the this Court. Considering the criminal antecedents of the applicants, the nature of the allegations, and the rejection of bail granted to the co-accused, it is prayed that the present bail application be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicants, and the material available on record, this Court finds that the complainant had lodged an FIR against unknown persons regarding the theft of his Activa scooter. During the course of investigation, the applicants were apprehended and their involvement in the theft of the said vehicle, as 4 well as several other stolen two-wheelers, came to light. The prosecution case further indicates that the applicants are allegedly involved in the theft of about 36 two-wheelers committed at different places over the last two years. It is also apparent from the record that both the applicants have multiple criminal antecedents of a similar nature and are involved in several other criminal cases. Further, the bail application of one of the co-accused has already been rejected by the competent Court. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, the criminal antecedents of the applicants, and their alleged involvement in multiple offences of a similar nature, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicants. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants – Roshan Ratre & Kamal Jangde filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, involved in Crime No. 517/2025 registered at Police Station - Civil Line Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2)317(2) & 3(5) of the BNS, 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 forthwith. Sd/- ASd (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaibhav