1 2025:CGHC:57785 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1792 of 2025 1 - Rakesh Kumar S/o Shri Narmada Prasad Aged About 52 Years R/o- Raman Nagar, Ward No. 18, Janjgir ,p.S And Tahsil.-Janjgir, Dist- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 2 - Shivam S/o Shri Rakesh Kumar Aged About 18 Years R/o- Raman Nagar, Ward No. 18, Janjgir ,p.S And Tahsil.-Janjgir, Dist-Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O. P. S. Janjgir, Dist. - Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.11.2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) has ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.11.27 19:13:04 +0530 2 been filed by the applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.938/2025 registered at Police Station Janjgir, Dist. - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 296, 3(5), 351(2) of BNS. 2. Prosecution case in brief is that the incident took place on 19.10.2025 at around 11:15 PM. The complainant, Virendra Kumar Singh, a retired police employee who recently underwent cancer surgery and is under treatment, was resting in his room when loud sounds of firecrackers were heard outside the house. His elder son Prafull Singh went to the door and saw Shivam Rathore, Rakesh Rathore and others bursting crackers. When Prafull requested them to stop as his father was unwell, the accused persons allegedly abused him in filthy language. When Prafull tried to reason with them, they allegedly threatened to kill him and assaulted him with sticks, rods, belts and a knife. Hearing the commotion, the complainant’s younger son Pranav Singh and daughter Priyanka Rani Singh intervened, but they were also beaten by the accused group. The complainant Virendra Singh also sustained injuries. Prafull suffered injuries on his head, left arm and chest, Pranav on his back, stomach and arm, Priyanka on her left arm, and the complainant on his head, chest and left arm. Witnesses Bijendra Singh, Jitendra Singh and nearby residents reportedly saw and heard the incident. Hence, the bail application. 3 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that there are cross-report of the incident and both the sides have received injuries, so far as applicant side is concerned, the complainant and his family members assaulted the applicants, causing injuries to them. The applicants also lodged an FIR regarding the incident, however, the police registered Crime No. 939/2025 only for minor offences under Sections 115(2), 296, 3(5), and 351(2) of the B.N.S., ignoring the fact that the applicants sustained grievous injuries in the assault. He also submits that the incident arose out of a minor dispute regarding the bursting of crackers during the Diwali festival, but due to the complainant’s influence as a retired police officer, the case against the applicants was made to appear more serious in nature, hence he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the present applicants are alleged to have assaulted the complainant Virendra Kumar Singh and his family over a dispute about bursting firecrackers, using sticks, rods, belts, and a knife. Multiple family members, including Prafull Singh, Pranav Singh, and Priyanka Rani Singh, were reportedly injured and the incident was witnessed by nearby residents. Therefore, the applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of dispute and material available in case diary, and the fact that though the applicants are alleged to have assaulted the complainant Virendra Kumar Singh and his family over a dispute about bursting firecrackers, using sticks, rods, belts, and a knife. Multiple family members, including Prafull Singh, Pranav Singh, and Priyanka Rani Singh, were reportedly injured, but considering the fact that there are cross- report of the incident and both the sides have received injuries, so far as complainant/injured side is concerned, the injury sustained by the complainant/injured side is not found to be dangerous to life, as such, without further commenting anything on merits, this Court find it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants - Rakesh Kumar and Shivam, on executing a personal bond with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) They 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 them from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) They shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. 5 (c) They shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicants and the sureties 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) They shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Abhishek