1 CGHC010175362026 2026:CGHC:28505 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4307 of 2026 Mahendra @ Monu Prajapati S/o Ramkumar Prajapati, Aged About 22 Years R/o Near Gaytri Mandir Sakri, P.S. Sakri, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Sakri, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Advocate For State/ Respondent : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2026 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 has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 233/2025, registered at Police Station - Sakri, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 305(A) and 331(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant namely Preamkumar Rai, R/o Sai Nature City Sagar Homes Sakri, P.S-Sakri has made report against the unknown person for commission of theft in PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.07.10 17:42:11 +0530 2 his home when he had gone to attend a family marriage function. It is further alleged that on 16.04.2025 his neighbor called and infomned him about the said theft. Thereafter a report was registered under Crime No. 233/2025, for the offence punishable 305(A), 331(4) BNS against the unknown person, thereafter Police Station Sakri investigated the matter. Challan has been filed before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. It is respectfully submitted that the essential ingredients of the offences alleged against the applicant are not made out from the material collected during investigation. He further submits that no theft item has been seized from the applicant. He further submits that the applicant has eight previous criminal antecedents of a similar nature, the details of which have been explained in paragraph 4.A of the bail application, and copies thereof have been annexed as Annexure A/3 to the bail application. The investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed. He further submits that applicant is in jail since 17.12.2025. Further, the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, it is prayed that applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, the State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He further submits that 8 criminal cases of similar nature are pending against the present applicant, which indicates that he is a habitual offender. Therefore, the present applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and further considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed, as well as the fact that the applicant has eight previous criminal antecedents of similar nature, which are pending, this Court is of the view that the applicant appears to be a habitual offender 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 the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti