1 2026:CGHC:12128 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1304 of 2026 Akash Yadav S/o Shatruhan Yadav Aged About 27 Years R/o Sanyasi Para In Front Of Solapuri Mata Mandir P.S. Khamtarai, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Khamtarai, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13/03/2026 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.1252/2025 registered at Police Station - Khamtarai, Raipur, District : Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.03.16 12:20:57 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant has giving information to the concerned police station that the appellant was moving knife at on such open place and information, the police has seized knife and has registered the case under section 25, 27 of the Arms Act against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is respectfully submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged crime and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. It is further submitted that there are no ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act made out against the present applicant from the prosecution story and the allegations levelled against him are false and baseless. The applicant neither possessed nor used any knife nor acted in the manner alleged by the prosecution, and therefore, looking to the material available on record, no prima facie case is made out against him. The applicant is in judicial custody and prolonged incarceration would adversely affect his future. The applicant also reserves his right to raise additional grounds at the time of hearing of the present bail application. It is further submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is ready to furnish adequate 3 surety and undertakes to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that on 05.02.2026, learned counsel for the applicant was granted time to explain the four criminal antecedents of the applicant. However, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that he is unable to explain the said criminal antecedents, as his local counsel has not provided the necessary instructions in this regard. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Despite the time granted to learned counsel for the applicant to explain the four criminal antecedents of the applicant vide order dated 05.02.2026, the same have not been explained, and it has been submitted that the applicant’s local counsel is unable to provide him with the necessary instructions. 7. In view of the same, also considering the nature of allegation against the applicant, further the fact that applicant has four criminal antecedents, 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 4 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. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant Akash Yadav involved in Crime No.1252/2025 registered at Police Station - Khamtarai, Raipur, District : Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, is rejected. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav