1 CGHC010221052026 2026:CGHC:29167 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5145 of 2026 Gitesh Kumar S/o Shri Ganga Prasad Aged About 23 Years R/o Village- Anwari Satnami Para (Bazar Chowk) Post Anwari (Aauri) P.S. Kurud District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Golbazar, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.06/2026 registered at GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2026.07.13 11:32:53 +0530 2 Police Station Golbazar, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 303(2) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that an FIR bearing Crime No. 06/2026 was lodged by complainant Gokul Yadav regarding the theft of his Activa scooter from Tehsil Office Parking. During the investigation, co-accused Lokesh Kumar Sahu and Roshan Ratre were interrogated, who allegedly confessed to stealing multiple vehicles and selling some to the applicant. Based solely on this memorandum statement, the applicant was implicated and arrested. It is alleged that the applicant is a receiver of stolen property. Hence the FIR. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that his implication is based only on the memorandum statement of the co-accused and there is no material to show that he had knowledge that the vehicle was stolen. He would submit that charge sheet has been filed, the applicant is in jail since 16/01/2026 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and she would submit that charge sheet has been filed before the competent court. She would submit that the 3 applicant has 9 criminal antecedents of similar nature, out which, only one criminal antecedent has been explained in para 4(a) of the bail application and rest of the cases have not been explained. She would submit that applicant is a habitual offender and he 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 and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation against the applicant, considering the fact that applicant has 9 criminal antecedents of similar nature, as such, he is 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, therefore this Court is of the opinion that this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant Gitesh Kumar involved in Crime No.06/2026 registered at Police Station Golbazar, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 303(2) of BNS, is rejected. 4 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri