1 CGHC010308502026 2026:CGHC:36987 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7333 of 2026 1 - Harsh Sidar @ Bittu S/o Santosh Sidar Aged About 19 Years Resident Of Village- Sukhda, Police Station- Dabhra, District- Sakti (C.G.) 2 - Gulshan Bareth S/o Lakhan Bareth Aged About 19 Years Resident Of Village- Sukhda, Police Station- Dabhra, District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Malkharauda, District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Dhirendra Mishra, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Rohan Shukla, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Order on Board 18/08/2026 This is the second bail application preferred by the Applicants under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, 2 seeking regular bail in connection with Crime No. 184/2026 registered at Police Station Malkharauda, Sakti (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2), 324(3), 112 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The earlier bail application preferred by the Applicants came to be dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 14.08.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 6698 of 2026.. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Sitaram, lodged a report stating that, after returning home, he parked the vehicle in front of his house and the next morning, his brother noticed that the glass of the rear-side window of his vehicle had been broken and when he saw the cash of Rs. 6,500/- kept inside the vehicle was missing. On the basis of the said report, the offence was initially registered against unknown persons. During the course of investigation, the Applicants were apprehended and, upon interrogation, they allegedly disclosed their involvement in the commission of the offence. On completion of investigation and on the basis of material collected during investigation the applicant were arrested, giving rise to the present application. 4. Learned counsel for the Applicants submits that the Applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the FIR was initially registered against unknown persons and that the Applicants were subsequently arrested merely on suspicion, without there being any proper investigation or cogent 3 material connecting them with the alleged offence. Learned counsel further submits that the Applicants have been in custody since 23.06.2026, the charge-sheet has not yet been filed, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. It is, therefore, prayed that the Applicants be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the connected matters pertain to the same accused and that the bail applications preferred therein have already been rejected. It is further submitted that the present Applicants have as many as 11 criminal antecedents and that, in respect of three of such antecedents, the bail applications preferred by the Applicants have already been rejected. 6. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the material available in the case diary, the nature of the allegations, the fact that the connected matters pertain to the same accused persons and that their bail applications have already been rejected, as also the fact that the present Applicants have as many as 11 criminal antecedents, out of which the bail applications preferred by the Applicants in respect of three antecedents have already been rejected, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the Applicants. Accordingly, their second bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2026.08.21 12:57:44 +0530