1 2025:CGHC:30579 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 961 of 2025 1. Suraj @ Lakeshwar Vaishnav S/o. Mahettar Vaishnav Aged About 22 Years R/o. Village Amora P.S. Mulmula, District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh) 2. Chandan Vaishnav S/o Mahettar Vaishnav Aged About 24 Years R/o. Village Amora P.S. Mulmula, District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Ravipal Maheshwari, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 04.07.2025 1. The applicants have 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. 32/2025, registered at Police Station – Akaltara, District – Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.07.05 14:50:14 +0530 2 punishable under Sections 309(4), 310(2), 3178(4), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, the complainant lodged a complaint at the concerned police station alleging, inter alia, that while he was returning from Giriraj Rice Mill, Jhalmala, at about 7:45 p.m. and had reached near Tarod, unknown persons arrived there on two motorcycles. One of them pushed the complainant and looted his motorcycle and mobile phone, valued at Rs. 60,000/-, and then fled from the spot. Based upon this complaint, the police registered an offence under Sections 309(4), 310(2), 318(4), and 3(5) of the B.N.S. against unknown persons. During the course of investigation, the police arrested two accused persons, and on the basis of their memorandum statements, the concerned police station registered the present offence against the applicants in connection with this crime. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits only on the basis of mere suspicion, the police have falsely lodged the FIR against the present applicants without conducting a proper investigation. The applicants have not committed any offence and have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the police authorities have wrongly added the applicants’ names in connection with this crime solely on the basis of the memorandum statement. The FIR was registered against unknown persons, and only on the basis of the memorandum of Aman Kumar Sahu, the present applicants have been falsely implicated in connection with this 3 crime. He further submits that the accused Aman Kumar Sahu was residing in a rented house belonging to the present applicants and was working as a Computer Operator at a cement plant. Due to this, the applicants’ names have been intricately connected with the crime. He also submits that when the applicant’s father asked Aman Kumar Sahu about the subject motorcycle, he stated that he had purchased the said second-hand motorcycle. Due to this, the applicant’s father did not raise any objection to keeping the motorcycle at the applicants’ house. The subject articles, namely the motorcycle and mobile phone, have not been seized from the possession of the present applicants and were recovered from the possession of Aman Kumar Sahu. He submits that the co-accused Aman Kumar Sahu has already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court vide its bail order dated 01.05.2025 in M.Cr.C. No. 3256/2025, therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory to the present applicants on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the anticipatory bail application of the present applicants and submits that the present applicants, along with other persons, have looted a motorcycle and mobile of the complainant valued at Rs. 60,000/- and fled from the spot, therefore, looking to the nature of the offence, the anticipatory bail application of the present applicants is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence and material on record in the case diary, and the fact that he present applicants, along with other persons, have looted a motorcycle and mobile of the complainant valued at Rs. 60,000/- and fled from the spot, therefore, considering the nature of the offence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants – Suraj @ Lakeshwar Vaishnav and Chandan Vaishnav, involved in Crime No. 32/2025, registered at Police Station – Akaltara, District – Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 309(4), 310(2), 3178(4), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek