Nafr High Court
Case Details
2025:CGHC:35826 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5296 of 2025 1 - Hari Vishwakarma S/o Shiv Vishwakarma Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Bahnakadi, P.S. Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Gulshan Patel @ Jhakki S/o Late Radhelal Patel Aged About 21 Years R/o Bhalukonha, P.S. Lawan, District Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Dhanendra Devdas @ Dhanna S/o Mayaku Devdas Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Munrethi, P.S. Mandir Hasaud, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Nand Kumar Yadav @ Vikash S/o Late Shambhu Yadav Aged About 21 Years R/o Tulsi, Rawabhantha Chowk, P.S. Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. versus ... Applicants State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.07.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of bail, apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 130/2025, registered at Police Station – Mandir Hasaud, Raipur (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 305(a), 331(4), 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. The prosecution story in brief is such that the complainant had lodged a report to the concerned Police Station, alleging that on the date of incident, the unknown persons have entered in his house by breaking the lock and committed theft of golden and silver ornaments valuation amounting to Rs. 2,53,800/- and cash of Rs. 50,000/- from his house and on the basis of the complaint made by the complainant, the police has registered the case against the unknown persons and after the investigation, the police has arrested the present applicants on the basis of memorandum statement. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the alleged crime, they have not committed any offence as alleged against them and there is no ingredient of offence punishable under sections 305 (a), 331(4), 3(5) of BNS against the present applicants. Further, the present applicants have neither entered in the house nor committed theft of any article of the complainant's house, and the prosecution has not collected the sufficient material from the possession of the applicants regarding theft of the said article and the police has not seized any said article from the applicants and they have not committed theft of the alleged articles and only on the basis of memorandum statement, the applicants have been arrested by police. The prosecution has cooked up a concocted story to falsely implicate the present applicants based upon the false and baseless allegations. Lastly, the applicant are languishing in jail since 11.04.2025 and though the charge-sheet has been filed, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the complainant has registered the case against the applicants for theft in his house stating that the applicants have committed theft of golden and silver ornaments valuation amounting to Rs. 2,53,800/- and cash of Rs. 50,000/- from his house and during investigation, accused Gulshan Kumar Patel, Hari Vishwakarma, Nandkumar Yadav and Dhanendra Devdas in their memorandum statements confessed to breaking the lock of the applicant's house in village Nakata, entering the house, breaking the cupboard and stealing the gold and silver ornaments and cash kept in the cupboard. They also told that accused Hari Vishwakarma kept the stolen gold and silver jewellery with himself and divided the cash amount among all the four of them. On the basis of the memorandum statement, the stolen gold and silver jewellery in the case was also seized from the possession of the applicant/accused Hari Vishwakarma. The accused were arrested on 11.04.2025. After complete investigation of the case, a charge-sheet has been submitted. Further, the applicant No.1, namely, Hari Vishwarkarma has 02 previous criminal antecedents, applicant No.2, namely, Gulshan Patel @ Jhakki has 3 previous criminal antecedents, applicant, No.3, namely, Dhanendra Devdas @ Dhanna has 02 criminal antecedents and applicant No.4, namely, Nand Kumar Yadav has 03 criminal antecedents and all are of similar nature of offence as such, they are habitual offenders and their bail application is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the allegations levelled against the applicants and submission made by learned State counsel and the fact that during investigation, accused Gulshan Kumar Patel, Hari Vishwakarma, Nandkumar Yadav and Dhanendra Devdas in their memorandum statements confessed to breaking the lock of the applicant's house in village Nakata, entering the house, breaking the cupboard and stealing the gold and silver ornaments and cash kept in the cupboard, they also told that accused Hari Vishwakarma kept the stolen gold and silver jewellery with himself and divided the cash amount among themselves and on the basis of the memorandum statement, the stolen gold and silver jewellery in the case was also seized from the possession of the applicant/accused Hari Vishwakarma. Further, the applicant No.1, namely, Hari Vishwarkarma has 02 previous criminal antecedents, applicant No.2, namely, Gulshan Patel @ Jhakki has 3 previous criminal antecedents, applicant, No.3, namely, Dhanendra Devdas @ Dhanna has 02 criminal antecedents and applicant No.4, namely, Nand Kumar Yadav has 03 criminal antecedents, which shows that applicants are habitual offenders and have misused the bail granted to them earlier and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble 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, though the charge-sheet has been filed and applicants are languishing in jail since 11.04.2025, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicants on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants – Hari Vishwakarma, Gulshan Patel @ Jhakki, Dhanendra Devdas @ Dhanna and Nand Kumar Yadav @ Vikash, involved in Crime No. 130/2025, registered at Police Station – Mandir Hasaud, Raipur (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 305(a), 331(4), 3(5) of BNS, 2023, stands 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. (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice sd/- alfiza