1 CGHC010367722026 2026:CGHC:41328 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8891 of 2026  Prakash Jaware Son Of Raju Jaware Aged About 24 Years Resident Of Village Ukava, Police Station Rupjhar, District Balaghat (M.P.) At Present Resident Of Lodhi Mohalla, Uparpara, Badi Koni, Police Station Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Of Police Chowki Naila, Police Station Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Gorelal Tandon, Advocate For State : Ms. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 23.09 .2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 269/2026 registered at Police Station Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 305(A), 331(4) and 3(5) of BNS. 2. Earlier, first bail application i.e. MCRC No. 7473 of 2026 was rejected on merits vide order dated 18.08.2026. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Saiyed Rafique Ali, lodged a complaint alleging that when he along with his family members had SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2026.09.23 18:41:55 +0530 2 gone to village Okhar (Malhar) to attend a marriage ceremony, unknown persons broke the lock of the window of his home on 11.04.2026 at about 2:00 a.m. and stole gold & silver ornaments and cash worth approximately Rs. 4,00,000/-. On such complaint, police registered the case and during investigation arrested the present applicant and other accused person for the aforesaid offences. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has falsely been implicated. He further submits that after rejection of the first bail application only 2 witnesses have been examined out of 12 witnesses and they have not supported the case of prosecution. It is argued that the applicant has three criminal antecedents, out of which he has been acquitted in one case, while the other two cases are pending consideration. He would further contend that the present applicant is in jail since 23.04.2026, charge sheet has also been filed and it will take time to conclude the trial. Thus, he would pray for grant of bail to the present applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the bail application. Ms. Sharma would contend that applicant has two previous criminal antecedents of similar nature of year 2026 and Rs. 4,00,000/- has been seized from exclusive possession of the present applicant. She submits that instant application deserves to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. First bail application was rejected on the ground that stolen property worth Rs. 4,00,000/- was seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant and he has two previous criminal antecedents of similar nature of year 2026. 3 8. Having considered the the allegations leveled against the present applicant and fact that first bail application was rejected on merits and there is no change in circumstances, I am not inclined to allow this application. 9. Accordingly, the instant application for the grant of bail is rejected. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE $iddhant