1 CGHC010336882026 2026:CGHC:44200 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8096 of 2026 1 - Deepak Chandravanshi S/o Ramesh Chandravanshi Aged About 23 Years R/o Ward No. 08, Vidyanagar, Kawardha, Police Station Tahsil And District- Kawardha (C.G.) ….Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Sankara, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) --- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, GA Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 13.10.2026 1) The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.186/2025 registered at Police Station Sankara, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(A),3(5), 61(2) & 317(2) of BNS. REKHA SINGH Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH DN: cn=REKHA SINGH, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.10.14 10:01:03 +0530 2 2) The prosecution case, in brief, is that during the intervening night of 04/05.12.2025, unknown persons broke into the house of the complainant and stole cash amounting to Rs.11,00,000/- and gold and silver ornaments worth Rs. 14,73,000/-. During the investigation, the present applicant was arrested, and gold ornaments weighing about 09 grams and silver ornaments weighing 78 grams were recovered from his possession. After completion of the investigation, the charge- sheet has been filed against the applicant and other co-accused persons. 3) Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He would further submit that the applicant is in jail since 14.08.2026. He would contend that the co-accused, namely, Yogesh Sahu, against whom there was one criminal antecedent, has already been granted bail in MCRC No.7150 of 2026. He would further contend that the other co-accused, namely, Hemant @ Kanha Agrawal and Shubham Sahu, have also been granted regular bail in MCRC Nos. 3584 of 2026 and 3892 of 2026, respectively. Therefore, on the ground of parity, the bail application of the present applicant may also be allowed. 4) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the applicant has four active criminal antecedents of a similar nature under the IPC and BNS. He would further submit that the applicant was involved in theft and dacoity cases, and the last case was registered against him in 2025. He would contend that the co-accused have been granted bail, as Yogesh Sahu had only one criminal antecedent and 3 the other co-accused had no criminal antecedents. He would further submit that, at the instance of the present applicant, 150 grams of gold ornaments, 500 grams of silver ornaments and cash were seized from his conscious possession. The stolen articles were also identified by the complainant. Therefore, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6) In the present bail application, the applicant has disclosed five criminal antecedents, out of which, four are pending before the learned trial Court. Nonetheless, the primary objectives of examining an accused person's criminal antecedents during bail proceedings are: (i) To assess the likelihood of compliance with bail conditions and ensure the accused will not flee or jump bail; (ii) To determine whether there is a habitual pattern of committing similar or grave offenses; and (iii) To evaluate the risk of evidence tampering, obstruction of the ongoing investigation, or witness intimidation. The existence of four 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) Having considered the fact that the applicant has five criminal antecedents, out of which he has been acquitted in one case and four cases are still pending consideration, it is evident that the applicant has a criminal history. In the year 2025, he was arrested in a case of dacoity, and two cases of theft are also pending against him. The stolen articles were seized at the instance of the present 4 applicant. The co-accused, Yogesh Sahu, was granted bail as he had only one criminal antecedent, whereas the other co-accused had no criminal antecedents. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Rekha