1 2025:CGHC:10860 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 294 of 2025 Nripnidhi Pandey S/o Giridhari Pandey Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Jogidadar, Police Station Singhoda, Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 05.03.2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 147/2023 registered at Police Station – Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 186 and 384 of the IPC. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. Prosecution case in brief is that the complainant Tekendra Kumar Chandrakar (Deputyn Engineer, PHE Department Saraipali) made complaint to the Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) alleging therein that on 05-06-2023, when he was working in his ofÏce alongwith other employees, at that time, the applicant alongwith other persons entered into his ofÏce, obstructed the work and asked for giving a byte, further the applicant has demanded money and started making video, thereafter, the accused persons threatened them of making video viral by publishing it in news channel, if they will not give them money, thereafter, the offence has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the alleged offence. Further, the co-accused, namely, Romy Saluja has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 07.01.2025 in MCRCA No. 2 of 2025 and the case of the present applicant is similar to that of the co-accused person. The applicant and the complainant earlier also had good relation between them and after the incident also, they have compromised the matter and the complainant have also executed an afÏdavit on 21.11.2024 in favour of applicant that the matter is compromised between them and he do not want to proceed further in the matter and do not want to take any adverse action against the applicant, which is also annexed with the bail application. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the prayer for 3 grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant, but could not dispute the fact the co-accused has already been granted bail and complainant has also filed an afÏdavit stating that the matter has been compromised. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents taken on record. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of dispute and material available in case diary and further the fact that co-accused, namely, Romy Saluja has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 07.01.2025 in MCRCA No. 2 of 2025 and the case of the present applicant is similar to that of the co-accused person and the complainant himself has filed an afÏdavit stating that the matter has already been compromised between the parties, as such, without further commenting anything on merits, this Court deems it fit to grant benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Nripnidhi Pandey, on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting OfÏcer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) He should not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) He should not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. 4 (c) He should appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The Applicant and the sureties shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) He should not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Kunal