1 CGHC010283252026 2026:CGHC:32099 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6741 of 2026 Vijay Jangde @ Blade Bachcha S/o Chhotu Jangde, Aged About 18 Years ( As Per Charge Sheet), R/o Housing Board Colony, Kachana Block No. 33, P.S. Khamhardih, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Mana Camp, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shalin Singh Baghel, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.07.2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 303/2025 registered at Police Station – Mana Camp, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(3), 305 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 5722/2026 was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 13.07.2026 with liberty to file a fresh bail application. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 22.09.2025, between 09:00 a.m. and 05:00 p.m., the applicant, along with the co-accused persons, broke open the lock of the main door of a house situated at Vidhayak Colony, Dharampura, Raipur, unlawfully entered the premises, and committed theft of gold and silver ornaments, including a gold necklace, mangalsutra, earrings and other silver articles, collectively valued at approximately Rs.1,00,000/-, which were kept in an almirah inside the house. Thereafter the applicant has been implicated in Crime No. 303/2025 registered at Police Station Mana Camp, District Raipur, for offences punishable under Sections 331(3), 305 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. During the course of investigation, the applicant and the co- accused persons were arrested. Hence, the present bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. It is further submitted that the first bail application being MCRC No. 5722/2026 was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh bail application vide order dated 13.07.2026. He contends that the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and, therefore, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. It is argued that the FIR was initially registered against an unknown person and the subsequent implication of the applicant creates serious doubt regarding the prosecution story and his alleged involvement. It is further submitted that the present applicant has 3 been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Chandan Chelak and no incriminating article has been seized from his possession. He also submits that the applicant has been wrongly arraigned as an accused merely on suspicion and that the co-accused Chandan Chelak has already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 04.05.2026 passed in MCRC No. 1604/2026, therefore, the case of the present applicant stands on a better footing and he is entitled to the benefit of parity. The applicant is a young boy and prolonged incarceration would seriously prejudice his future prospects. It is also submitted that the applicant has only one criminal antecedent, bearing Crime No. 88/2025, which is still pending trial, and except for the said case, no other criminal case is registered against him. He also submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 19.03.2026 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion . Therefore, he prays for grant of second bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the second bail application of the present applicant and submits that there is sufficient material available on record indicating the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence. It is contended that the applicant has deliberately suppressed his criminal antecedents and has incorrectly stated that only one criminal case is pending against him. Learned State counsel has pointed out that the applicant is, in fact, involved in as many as six criminal cases, out of which five are of similar nature relating to theft and house-breaking offences, 4 bearing Crime No. 71/2023 under Section 394 of IPC, Crime No. 398/2023 under Sections 457, 380, 411 and 34 of IPC, Crime No. 20/2022 under Sections 379 and 34 of IPC, Crime No. 323/2022 under Sections 294, 323 and 506 of IPC, Crime No. 217/2022 under Sections 457 and 380 of IPC, and Crime No. 175/2024 under Sections 457 and 380 of IPC. It is further submitted that the present applicant is a habitual offender and his repeated involvement in offences of a similar nature clearly reflects his criminal propensity. Hence, it is contended that the applicant does not deserve any relief at this stage. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that this is the second bail application filed by the applicant, the first bail application being MCRC No. 5722/2026 having already been dismissed with liberty to file a fresh bail application vide order dated 13.07.2026, and further considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material available on record, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed, and particularly the criminal antecedents of the applicant though learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has only one criminal antecedent, but the learned State counsel has pointed out that the applicant is involved in six criminal cases, namely Crime No. 71/2023 under Section 394 of IPC, Crime No. 398/2023 under Sections 457, 380, 411 and 34 of IPC, Crime No. 20/2022 under Sections 379 and 34 of IPC, Crime No. 323/2022 under Sections 5 294, 323 and 506 of IPC, Crime No. 217/2022 under Sections 457 and 380 of IPC, and Crime No. 175/2024 under Sections 457 and 380 of IPC. Significantly, five out of the aforesaid cases are of similar nature involving offences of theft, house-breaking and allied offences. The applicant, while seeking indulgence of this Court, has not approached the Court with complete candour and has failed to disclose his entire criminal history, instead projecting that only one criminal case is pending against him. Such non-disclosure and suppression of material facts assumes considerable significance in a bail proceeding, where the antecedents and conduct of the accused are relevant factors for exercise of judicial discretion. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant second bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant – Vijay Jangde @ Blade Bachcha, involved in Crime No. 303/2025 registered at Police Station – Mana Camp, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(3), 305 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 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 Rahul Dewangan