Multiple criminal antecedents and prior bail rejection warranted denial of regular bail.

The applicants were arrested in connection with Crime No. 127/2026 registered at Police Station Jaijaipur, District Sakti, for offences under Sections 303(2), 324(3), 112 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”)

The prosecution alleged that, during the night of 10–11 May 2026, the complainant’s Mahindra Pickup was damaged by breaking its front, driver-side and helper-side windows with a brick, and that an iron jack and rod worth approximately ₹10,000 were stolen from the vehicle

The FIR was initially registered against unknown persons; following investigation, the applicants were arrested on 9 July 2026 and a charge-sheet was submitted

The applicants sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, contending that the case was triable by a Magistrate, the maximum punishment was three years, and they had been implicated merely on suspicion

The State opposed bail, pointing out that the applicants’ earlier bail application in Crime No. 130/2026 had been rejected and that they had ten criminal antecedents involving similar offences

1. Whether the applicants should be granted regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the offences, the maximum prescribed punishment, and the period of incarceration?

2. Whether the applicants’ ten criminal antecedents and the rejection of their bail application in another case justified refusal of bail in the present crime?

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant regular bail to an accused in custody

The alleged offences were under Sections 303(2), 324(3), 112 and 3(5) of the BNS, and the Court considered the applicants’ submission that the matter was triable by the Judicial Magistrate First Class and carried a maximum punishment of three years

In exercising its discretionary bail jurisdiction, the Court considered the completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, the applicants’ prior criminal antecedents, and the rejection of their bail application in Crime No. 130/2026

No judicial precedent was cited or relied upon.

Although the applicants relied on the relatively limited maximum punishment, their period of incarceration, and the fact that the FIR initially named unknown persons, the Court found the contrary circumstances more significant

The investigation had culminated in the filing of the charge-sheet, reducing the force of the applicants’ contention that continued custody was attributable to delay in investigation

The Court also took into account that the applicants had ten criminal antecedents registered under the same or similar BNS provisions and that their bail application in Crime No. 130/2026 had already been rejected by the Court

On an overall consideration of the case diary and these circumstances, the Court held that the applicants were not entitled to the discretionary relief of bail

The bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, was accordingly rejected, principally because of the applicants’ ten similar criminal antecedents, the prior rejection of bail in another case, and the filing of the charge-sheet