1 CGHC010321992026 2026:CGHC:37450 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7765 of 2026 Shantanu Sikka S/o Raju Sikka, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Jyoti Nagar, Kota P. S. - Sarswati Nagar, District – Raipur, C. G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Sarswati Nagar, Distirct -Raipur C. G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Leekesh Kumar, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20.08.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 113/2026 registered at Police Station – Sarswati Nagar, Distirct -Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 02.06.2026, the police allegedly received secret information from an informer that the applicant/accused was standing near the Kukurbeda Overbridge, Raipur (C.G.), and was allegedly threatening passers-by while being in illegal possession of a knife. Acting upon the said information, the police reached the spot and, PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.08.24 17:35:43 +0530 2 an iron knife from the possession of the applicant/accused. Thereafter, the applicant/accused was arrested, and a case was registered against him as Crime No. 113/2026 at Police Station Saraswati Nagar, Raipur (C.G.), for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has been filed before the learned trial Court, therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required. Further, the applicant has one previous criminal antecedents which is pending and the same has been explained in Part – D of this bail application. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that the applicant has three criminal antecedents of a similar nature, out of which one has been explained in Part - D of this bail application. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the allegations, and further considering that the applicant has three previous criminal antecedents of a similar nature which shows that 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 cancelled the bail granted to the accused on the ground of previous criminal antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 3 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant - Shantanu Sikka involved in Crime No. 113/2026 registered at Police Station – Sarswati Nagar, Distirct - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti