1 CGHC010364652026 2026:CGHC:42741 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8742 of 2026  Amrit Patel @ Patalu Patel S/o Shri Ramlal Patel, Aged About 37 Years R/o Sakti, Sarwani, Police Station - Sakti, Distt. Sakti, Present Address - Katghora, Distt. Korba (C.G.) --- Applicant versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Distt. Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) --- Non-applicant WITH MCRC No. 8914 of 2026  Amrit Patel @ Patalu Patel S/o Shri Ramlal Patel Aged About 37 Years R/o Sakti, Sarwani, Police Station - Sakti District Sakti, Present Address - Katghora, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ---Applicant Versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate District Janjgir - Champa, Chhattisgarh --- Non-applicant WITH MCRC No. 8908 of 2026  Amrit Patel @ Patalu Patel S/o Shri Ramlal Patel Aged About 37 Years R/o Sakti, Sarwani, Police Station - Sakti, District Sakti, Present Address Katghora, Distt. Korba Chhattisgarh ---Applicant Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.10.05 14:02:07 +0530 2 Versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Distt. Janjgir- Champa Chhattisgarh --- Non-applicant WITH MCRC No. 8829 of 2026  Amrit Patel @ Patalu Patel S/o Shri Ramlal Patel Aged About 37 Years R/o Sakti, Sarwani, Police Station - Sakti, Distt. Sakti, Present Address Katghora, Distt. Korba Chhattisgarh ---Applicant Versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Distt. Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh (Also Mentioned In The Impugned Order As State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Balouda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa C.G.) --- Non-applicant WITH MCRC No. 8780 of 2026  Amrit Patel @ Patalu Patel S/o Shri Ramlal Patel Aged About 37 Years R/o Sakti , Sarwani Police Station Sakti, Distt- Sakti, Present Address Katghora Distt- Korba (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Distt- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) (Also Mentioned In The Impugned Order As State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Balouda Distt- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) --- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Khilendra Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava and Ms. Saumya Sharma, Panel Lawyers 3 Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 01.10.2026 1. The applicant has preferred these First Bail Applications under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with several crimes registered at Police Station Baloda, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.), the particulars of which are detailed below: Case No. Crime No. Offence u/s MCRC/8742/2026 196/2026 Sections 331(4) and 305(a) of BNS MCRC/8780/2026 473/2025 Sections 331(4), 305(a), 112(1) and 3(5) of BNS MCRC/8829/2026 195/2026 Sections 331(4), 305(a), 112(1) and 3(5) of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act MCRC/8908/2026 197/2026 Sections 331(4) and 305(a) of BNS MCRC/8914/226 194/2026 Sections 331(4), 305(a), 112(1) and 3(5) of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act 2. According to the prosecution, on the intervening night of May 2–3, 2026, unidentified persons broke into several houses and stole various articles, including cash and jewellery. Some of the stolen property was subsequently recovered from a nearby field. Based on these allegations, the police registered Crime Nos. under the relevant provisions of law. During the course of the investigation, the police arrested the applicant and allegedly seized several stolen articles from his possession. 4 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in these cases on the basis of memorandum statements and suspicion of the police authorities. He further submits that applicant has 14 criminal antecedents of similar nature and he has been acquitted in 03 cases. He contends that all such antecedents have been duly explained in Part-D (Criminal Antecedents) of the present bail application. He further contends that charge-sheet has been filed in all these cases before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 04.05.2026 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submit that in the present cases, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and various articles were recovered from the possession of present applicant. They further submit that the applicant has 11 live criminal antecedents of similar nature which makes him a habitual offender. Hence, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. In the present bail application, the applicant has disclosed 14 criminal antecedents, pointing out that he has already been acquitted in 03 of those cases. Nonetheless, the primary objectives of examining an accused person's criminal 5 antecedents during bail proceedings are:  To assess the likelihood of compliance with bail conditions and ensure the accused will not flee or jump bail;  To determine whether there is a habitual pattern of committing similar or grave offenses; and  To evaluate the risk of evidence tampering, obstruction of the ongoing investigation, or witness intimidation. The existence of 11 pending criminal antecedents of an identical nature underscores a persistent pattern of offending, raising a grave apprehension of offense repetition if he is enlarged on bail. 7. 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 bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the instant bail applications are rejected. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a