1 2025:CGHC:59448 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1929 of 2025 Aniket @ Munni Tripathi S/o Sunil Tripathi Aged About 25 Years R/o House No. 306/5, Podibahar, Thakurchal, Kosabadi, Police Station - Civil Line Rampur, Tahsil And District - Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Civil Line Rampur, District - Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 08/12/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.296/2025, registered at Police Station Civil Line Rampur, AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 District - Korba (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 109, 3(5) of BNS. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the on 16.05.2025 at about 11:15 PM, near Bhagwat Nagar, Podibahar, the complainant’s brother Pramod Yadav was talking with his friend Vikrant Sahu when accused Radhe, Munni Tripathi, and Monty, due to previous enmity, allegedly attacked him. Radhe, holding a knife, assaulted Pramod Yadav with the intention to kill him. Hearing his brother’s cries for help, the complainant came out and saw all three accused assaulting Pramod Yadav, Radhe was attacking him with a knife while holding a mobile phone in the other hand. When the complainant tried to intervene, Radhe also attacked him, and Vikrant Sahu. Due to the attack, Pramod Yadav sustained serious injuries on his stomach, chest, waist, face and hand, and the complainant also suffered an injury on the finger of his right hand. On this basis, an offence under Sections 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita was registered against the applicant/accused. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that as per the prosecution story itself, the present applicant did not play any active role in the incident. The scuffle took place only between the juvenile and the injured, and the applicant had no prior enmity or rivalry with the victim. No overt act or specific allegation of assault is attributed to the applicant except that he was merely present, therefore he is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory 3 bail. He also submits that anticipatory bail of co-accused Ayush Kumar Singh @ Monti (M.Cr.C.(A) 1741/2025) was rejected on the ground that he actively participated by holding the victim during the assault. The role of the present applicant is clearly distinguishable, as no specific allegation of assault has been made against him and only a general omnibus allegation exists. Hence, the applicant deserves anticipatory bail. He lastly, submits that the main accused is a juvenile in conflict with law who had old enmity with the victim and who alone inflicted the grievous injuries with a knife. The applicant neither used any weapon nor caused any injury, and only vague allegations have been made against him. Therefore, the applicant is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the applicant is alleged to have accompanied the other accused persons during the assault on Pramod Yadav. It is alleged that all the accused collectively attacked the victim due to previous enmity, during which sharp-edged weapon injuries were inflicted on the vital parts of the victim’s body, further the bail application of co-accused, namely, Ayush Kumar Singh who caught hold of the injured has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 10.11.2025 in MCRCA No.1741 of 2025 and present applicant has also caught of the injured while other were making assault on the injured, therefore, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant deserves to be rejected. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the nature of allegation made against the present applicant that he accompanied the other accused persons during the assault on Pramod Yadav, all the accused collectively attacked the injured due to previous enmity, during which sharp- edged weapon injuries were inflicted on the vital parts of the injured’s body, further considering the fact that the bail application of co-accused, namely, Ayush Kumar Singh who caught hold of the injured has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 10.11.2025 in MCRCA No.1741 of 2025 and present applicant has also caught of the injured while other were making assault on the injured, as such, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant - Aniket @ Munni Tripathi, involved in Crime No.296/2025, registered at Police Station Civil Line Rampur, District - Korba (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 109, 3(5) of BNS is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil