1 2025:CGHC:19630 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 578 of 2025 Mohd. Munan S/o Mohd. Muslim, aged about 25 years, R/o Village- Araila, Post- Mannu Dehari, P.S. Tiyar, Distt. Bhojpur (Bihar) (Correction Made As Per Challan) ... Applicant Versus State of Chhattisgarh, through Station House Officer, P.S. - Balrampur, Dist. Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Ajay Pandey, G.A. Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 30.04.2025 Heard. 1. The accused/applicant moved this First bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 has been filed by the applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 115/2019 registered at Police Station- Balrampur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for commission of the offence punishable under Sections 468, 471 of IPC & Sec. 25(1A) , 25 (1) (a) 25 (1AA) of Arms Act. Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU 2 2. Allegation against the present applicant is that he is in association with other co-accused persons, prepared forged pistol license bearing No. 462/ADMR date 13.03.2009 and supplied the same to another co- accused Dhiraj Singh Dev for using it as genuine one. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case. No. case is made out against the applicant regarding commission of offence as alleged. The co-accused Dhiraj Singh Dev has been released on anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 09.08.2019 passed in MCRCA No. 1071/2019; the other co-accused Mohd. Muslim has been released on regular bail by this Court vide order dated 12.08.2022 passed in MCRC No. 6075/2022. He further contends that the co-accused had obtained the license through an arms dealer. The license dated 13.03.2009 was issued to him by State of Jammu & Kashmir. The date in the license got extended and the co-accused purchased a pistol from Indian Ordinance Factory on 09.02.2018, regarding which he sent intimation to the licensing authority. Later on when the election came, he deposited the pistol in the police station and also license along with copy of the license granted to him. However, the police has got verified the license, which has found to be fake. The applicant was never conversant with the facts that this license was fake and he is not the person,and he is only falsely implicated as he is the father of the licensee arms dealer. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the anticipatory bail application and further submits that the license of the applicant was found to be a fake one on verification, as such he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, quality of evidence against the applicant and further considering the fact that the other co- accused persons namely Dhiraj Singh Dev in MCRCA No.1071/2019 has been extended privilege of anticipatory bail, vide order dated 09.08.2019 by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the other co- accused person namely Mohd. Muslim in MCRC No.6075/2022 has been extended privilege of regular bail, vide order dated 12.08.2022 by 3 this Court. As the charge-sheet has already been filed, there is no apprehension of the applicant absconding or tampering with the evidence and that conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, as such, without commenting anything on merit of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is allowed. 7. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with aforesaid crime number, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one local surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting/investigating officer or the court concerned, as the case may be, with the following terms and conditions: (i) He shall 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; (ii) He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and (iii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial; (iv) He shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. 8. The observations made in the course of this order are only for considering the case of the applicant on the application for grant of anticipatory bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by any observations made hereinabove. Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge U.K. Raju