2025:CGHC:16700 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 492 of 2025 Rajesh Sharma S/o Ramfal Sharma Aged About 47 Years (Not Mentioned In Order Sheet) R/o Maruti Enclave Church Road, Tatibandh, Amanaka Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer Police Station Amanaka, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 09.04.2025 1. Proceedings of this case have been taken through video conferencing. 2. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 78/2025, registered at Police Station – Amanaka, District – Raipur (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 298, 299, 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of BNS and Section 4 of C.G. Freedom of Religion Act 1968. 3. As per the case of the prosecution, in brief is that the complainant KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN Manish Verma has lodged an FIR against the applicant along with other co-accused before the concerned Police Station with the averment that he along with other accused persons have interrupted in the construction of Temple by destroying the statue of God. It is also alleged that they attacked upon the complainant and given allurement for conversion of religion. Based upon such, the aforesaid offences have been registered against the accused persons. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been roped in a false crime. He further submits that the accused persons and the complainant are the resident of same place therefore acquainted with each other and the case arising of the same incident one counter FIR has also been lodged i.e. Crime No.79/2025. Further it is submitted that against the complainant Manish Verma (Crime No.78/2025) named FIR has been lodged along with other accused persons. He further submits that the applicant is not present on the spot at the time of incident but he has been named in the FIR. The applicant has given a written report to the Superintendent of Police, Station House OfÏcer, Amanaka, Raipur and DIG, Raipur subject to his non presence on the place of incident through postal service. Accordingly, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant and submits that there are cross FIR have been lodged against both the parties further from perusal of the case diary, it appears that the applicant along with other co-accused interrupted in the construction of temple, destroying its foundation and breaking the Hanuman idol. When devotees, including the complainant, protested, they were brutally assaulted with sticks, stones, and chairs, leaving many seriously injured. The attackers also desecrated the temple by throwing bones inside. When confronted, the accused threatened the complainant and his associates, saying they could do as they pleased and the law wouldn't affect them. They also allegedly abused god and mentioned that Christian conversions had been taking place in the nearby church for several months. Accordingly, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order passed by the trial Court. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicant and further the fact that from perusal of the case diary, it appears that the applicant along with co- accused are involved in serious offences related to promoting conversions, physical assault, and vandalism of idol of Hanuman, further there are cross reports have been registered against both the parties hence, looking to the seriousness of this case, this Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Rajesh Sharma, filed under Section 482 of BNSS involved in Crime No. 78/2025, registered at Police Station – Amanaka, District – Raipur (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 298, 299, 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of BNS and Section 4 of C.G. Freedom of Religion Act 1968, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal