1 2025:CGHC:53432 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1646 of 2025 1 - Rameshwar Chandrakar S/o Jodhan Chandrakar Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Bipatra, P.S. Pipariya, District Kabirdham C.G. 2 - Anil Chandrakar S/o Sukhna Chandrakar Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Tunupaar, P.S. Pipariya, District Kabirdham C.G. 3 - Jageshwar Chandrakar S/o Sukhna Chandrakar Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Tunupaar, P.S. Pipariya, District Kabirdham C.G. ... Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Pipariya, District Kabirdham C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer SB : Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice ORDER ON BOARD 31/10/2025 1. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has filed the copy of the bail rejection order with the correct crime number bearing Crime No. 276/2025 as earlier, crime number was wrongly mentioned in the bail application as Crime No. 276/2026. Therefore, this case may be taken up for hearing finally. 2. With the consent of parties, case is heard finally. 2 3. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 276/2025 registered at Police Station – Pipariya, District - Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296 (2), 351, 324 (4), 331 (2) & 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’). 4. Case of prosecution in brief is that, on 02.10.2025, the complainant namely Rajeshwari Mishra W/o. Vikaschand Mishra lodged a complaint in the concerned police station alleging that she along with her husband and care taker Sandeep had gone to Village Biptara to celebrate Dusshera at about 8.30 pm, her husband and sons were sitting inside the house at the same time, the applicants i.e. Rameshwar Chandrakar, Anil Chandrakar and Jageshwarl @ Golu Chandrakar came in a drunken condition and started abusing with filthy language and when her care taker Sandeep asked them to stop they started assaulting and broke the window and thereafter, the complaint has been lodged. Based on the report, aforementioned crime was registered and the investigation was commences by the concerned police station. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that, the present applicants were servants of the original land owner i.e. Chandrabhan Mishra who is father-in-law of the complainant and they were taking care of the land of their owner who had appointed the Applicant No. 1 in his power of attorney. Further, late Chandrabhan Mishra had taken agricultural pipes from Applicant Jageshwar Chandrakar for agricultural purposes which was known to his daughters and the complainant and it was that the applicants were taking back their pipes from the godown of their owner which led to quarrel between the parties. The Applicant No. 1 had also made complaint before the concerned police station regarding the said 3 quarrel. Further, the applicant has also made applications before the Superintendent of Police, Kabirdham and they have not made any assault on the complainant .The injuries sustained by the complainant’s family members are simple in nature and thus, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that present applicant there are specific allegations of commission of assault by the applicant on the complainant and her family members. He submits that the family members of the complainant suffered grievous injuries over their persons and thus, the applicants may not be enlarged on anticipatory bail.. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of dispute and material available in case diary, injuries sustained by the complainant’s family members to be simple in nature, as such, without further commenting anything on merits, this Court find it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 9. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Rameshwar Chandrakar, Anil Chandrakar & Jageshwar Chandrakar, 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) He 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. (b) He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 4 (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) He shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY