1 2025:CGHC:36224 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1110 of 2025 • Abdul Junaid Siddiqui S/o Abdul Rahim Siddiqui Aged About 33 Years R/o Near Chhattisgarh College Bayron Bajar Raipur, District Raipur C.G. ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station- Mujgahan, District Raipur C.G. ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer For Objector Mr. Sabysanchi Bhaduri, Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 25.07.2025 1. This is first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.96/2025 registered at Police Station – Mujgahan, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant namely Minajuddin filed written complaint on 11.05.2025 alleging that the main accused of Sultana Begum had filed a civil suit regarding the VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.07.29 10:43:25 +0530 2 death of her husband Shahid Muneer thereafter Shahid Muneer was declared civil death by the order of civil court dated 17.12.2021. The co-accused Sultana Begum taking the advantage of this illegally prepared forged revenue documents she muted her name in the revenue records for the land situated at village Doma Khasra No.216/7 part measuring 1120 hectares. Thereafter co-accused sultana Begum executed power of attorney in the name of the applicant. Thereafter, the property was sold out on 14.08.2024 to third person namely Moti Skehikh. Therefore, the complainant lodged the report on 11.05.2025. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It has also been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there was a civil dispute between the applicant and the complainant in respect of land and one more FIR has been registered against the present applicant, which was lodged by the wife of the deceased/complainant bearing crime No.11/2023 registered at police station – Sarawati Nagar, District-Raipur (C.G) for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B-34 of the IPC, and, in the said crime, the anticipatory bail was rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MCRCA No.257 of 2025 vide order dated 08.04.2025, against which, the applicant preferred SLP No.6615 of 2025 and the same was allowed on 05.05.2025 by the Apex Court, copy of the said order is annexed as Annexure-A/7. However, the present FIR is also lodged by the complainant because a civil dispute existed between the parties. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel 3 for the Objector opposed the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant, and from the perusal of the case diary it transpires that there was a civil dispute between the applicant and the complainant in respect of land and one more FIR has been registered against the present applicant, which was lodged by the wife of the deceased/complainant bearing crime No.11/2023 registered at police station – Sarawati Nagar, District-Raipur (C.G) for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B-34 of the IPC, and, in the said crime, the anticipatory bail was rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MCRCA No.257 of 2025 vide order dated 08.04.2025, against which, the applicant preferred SLP No.6615 of 2025 and the same was allowed on 05.05.2025 by the Apex Court, and the present FIR is also lodged by the complainant because a civil dispute existed between the parties this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant –Abdul Junaid Siddqui on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The Applicant 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. 4 (b) The Applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicant shall 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 surety 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)The Applicant shall not involve themself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaishali