1 2025:CGHC:9379 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 271 of 2025 1 - Shankar Rai S/o Late Sunil Rai Aged About 34 Years R/o Sanjay Nagar, Latori, Police Station - Jaynagar, Dist.- Surajpur (C.G.) 2 - Shilpa Rai D/o Sanjay Rai Aged About 28 Years R/o Sanjay Nagar, Latori, Police Station - Jaynagar, Dist- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. - Jaynagar, District - Surajpur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Ashutosh Biswas, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 24.02.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 22/2025, registered at Police Station – Jaynagar, District – Surajpur, (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 296, 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, in brief, is that a complaint was filed by one Rahul Rai, alleging that on 12.01.2025, the applicants (his uncle and aunt) came and uprooted the plants in the backyard of his RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 house. Upon learning about this, the complainant’s father shouted, prompting the applicants to come out of their house, abuse his father, and threaten to kill him. It is further alleged that, amid a family dispute over partition, the applicants took a wooden log and struck the complainant’s father on the head. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicants are the actual victim in the case as the complainant is very abusive and assaultive in nature. He also submits that the applicant No.01 Shankar Rai and victim Sanjay Rai are brother and there have been a disputes pertaining to ancestral land, the applicant No.02 Shilpa Rai lodged an FIR against the complainant & other family member bearing crime No. 21/2025 dated 18.01.2025. He further argued that the complainant after very well aware of the fact that the FIR has been lodged against him the prior day and in order to cover up the matter malicioiusly lodged an FIR bearing crime No. 22/2025 against the present applicants on the subsequent day in order to falsely implicate them. He further submits that the applicant No.1 and applicant No.2 are husband and wife and having two young children. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the present applicants came and uprooted the plants in the backyard of his house. Upon learning about this, the complainant’s father shouted, prompting the applicants to come out of their house, abuse his 3 father, and threaten to kill him. It is further alleged that, amid a family dispute over partition, the applicants took a wooden log and struck the complainant’s father on the head. As a result, the injuries sustained to the injured are grievous in nature, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail in the present matter. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the fact that the present applicants came and uprooted the plants in the backyard of his house, upon learning about this, the complainant’s father shouted, prompting the applicants to come out of their house, abuse his father, and threaten to kill him and further, amid a family dispute over partition, the applicants took a wooden log and struck the complainant’s father on the head, as a result, the injuries sustained to the injured are grievous in nature, therefore, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants – Shankar Rai and Shilpa Rai , involved in Crime No. 22/2025, registered at Police Station – Jaynagar, District – Surajpur, (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 296, 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan