1 2025:CGHC:44990 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1321 of 2025 Sanjay Bandhe S/o Sukhiram Bandhe, Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Mini Basti Jarhabhatha, Thana Civil Line, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Civil Line District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant(s) (Cause Title is taken from the Case Information System) For Applicant :Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant /State :Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 03/09/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of BNSS for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.806/2025, registered at Police Station – Civil Line, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 326(g), 191(2), 3(5) of B.N.S. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. As per the case of the prosecution on 13/07/25 at about 5 pm, the complainant namely Kaushaliya Bhaskar has lodged oral report against the present applicant and other co- accused person stating that son of complainant namely Suraj Bhaskar has assaulted the brother of applicant namely Sumit Bandhe due to which the brother of applicant has died. Thereafter the present applicant and his family member set fire to his house. Thereafter police has registered the offence against the present applicant and other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the brother of the applicant was murdered by the son of the complainant along with other persons, for which an FIR has been lodged by the applicant against the son of the complainant and the co-accused persons under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. on 13.07.2025 at about 5:20 PM, which was registered as Crime No. 805/2025 (copy of the FIR is annexed as Annexure A/3). It is further submitted that the applicant, along with his real brothers, is alleged to have set ablaze the house of the complainant. Three of his brothers, who are co-accused in the present case, have already been arrested and are in jail. The applicant, however, is a handicapped person of 65% and was not present at the spot at the time of the incident. It is also submitted that the other family members of the applicant have been in jail since 06.08.2025 and 14.08.2025. Accordingly, the applicant prays for grant of anticipatory bail. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the applicant is involved in a serious offence of arson, where the complainant’s house was deliberately set on fire with petrol, causing damage of about ₹3,50,000/- and endangering human life. Co-accused, in his memorandum, has clearly admitted the involvement of the applicant along with others. One accused is still absconding and investigation is incomplete. Witnesses are already under fear and not supporting openly. Further the applicant has six criminal antecedents. Considering the gravity of offence, possibility of tampering, and stage of investigation, the applicant does not deserve anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order passed by the trial Court. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicant and the fact that the brother of the applicant was murdered by the son of the complainant along with other persons, for which an FIR has been lodged by the applicant against the son of the complainant and the co-accused persons under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. on 13.07.2025 at about 5:20 PM, which was registered as Crime No. 805/2025 (copy of the FIR is annexed as Annexure A/3) and thereafter, the applicant, along with his real brothers, is alleged to have set ablaze the house of the complainant and three of his brothers, who are co-accused in the present case, have already 4 been arrested and are in jail however, the applicant is a handicapped person, but his involvement in the present case, appears to be reasonable and further he has six criminal antecedents, therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence, the deliberate and intentional act of setting the house on fire with petrol, the danger posed to human lives, the huge financial loss caused, and the fact that investigation is still pending thus, this Court is of the view that the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail application of the applicant – Sanjay Bandhe, filed under Section 482 of BNSS involved in Crime No.806/2025, registered at Police Station –Civil Line, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 326(g), 191(2), 3(5) of B.N.S., is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal