1 2025:CGHC:59280 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1923 of 2025 Anjana Jangde W/o Balkrishna Jangde Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Temri, P.S Nandghat District Bemetra (C.G.) Presently R/o Lig-1/13 Pirda Housing Board Colony, P.S Vidhansabha, District Raipur (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Tilda Nevra, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Gyan Prakash Dandekar and Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Ubeja, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 05.12.2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 358/2025 registered at Police Station – Tilda Nevra District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 232(1), 190 of BNS. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.12.06 12:09:45 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story in brief is that, on 18.08.2025 complainant namely Pramod Kumar Verma has lodged the written complaint against seven accused persons namely LuckkyMaharaj, SurajVerma, BabulalVerma, RajatVerma, Ajay Rahuja, Ajay Nishad and GappuVerma @ Deepak Verma and others alleging that on 07.08.2025 the complainant is the prosecution witness in Crime No. 109/2021 for the offence under Section 376, 1208, 450, 506, 307 of IPC whereby he was summoned to appear before the court on 07.08.2025 in learned Additional Session Judge (Fast Track Court) Raipur, Chhattisgarh in Session Trial No. 235/2021 "State Vs. BalkrishnaJangde and Another", it is alleged that the co-accused persons has tried to threaten the complainant who is the witness in the aforesaid criminal trial and co-accused Luckky Maharaj and Gappu Verma are the one who has called the complainant to give evidence in favour of Jangde Madam. That, the applicant is not name in FIR co- accused Dinesh Dongre who has stated the name of applicant in the memorandum statement recorded on 16.10.2025 has alleged that he has done the act on information of present applicant. FIR was lodged on 18.08.2025 vide Crime No. 358/2025 in Police Station Tilda Nevra under Section 232 (1), 190 of BNS Act, 2023. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits, he neither committed nor participated in any act constituting the alleged offences. The charge-sheet filed on 16.10.2025 shows that several co-accused have already been charge-sheeted, whereas the applicant has been wrongly shown as absconding despite regularly appearing before the Trial Court in Sessions Trial No. 235/2021 on 3 multiple dates. The present FIR is based solely on suspicion and on the memorandum statements of co-accused, even though the complainant himself has given a no-objection before the Trial Court in the bail proceedings of co-accused Deepak Kumar Verma and Ravikant Verma, stating that he named them by mistake, which creates serious doubt about the prosecution version. All co-accused, including Deepak Verma, Ravikant Verma, Suraj Verma, Rajat Verma, Jaymohan @ Lucky Sharma, and Ajay Rahuja, have already been granted bail, placing the applicant’s case on an equal or better footing. The complainant has concocted the present false case with mala fide intent to terrorize the applicant and to seek cancellation of the bail earlier granted to her in FIR No. 109/2021, as evident from the fact that an application for cancellation of her bail (CrMP No. 2877/2025) was filed even before the present allegations surfaced. The applicant, a government servant with a B.Sc. (Agriculture) degree, has no likelihood of absconding or tampering with evidence and has been consistently cooperating with the court proceedings; yet she was wrongly shown as absconding on 16.10.2025 when the final report was filed. The applicant, therefore, prays that she be granted bail and reserves her right to raise additional grounds at the time of hearing. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the non- applicant/State opposes the bail application. 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 and nature of dispute and materials 4 available on record, 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 applicant – Anjana Jangde, on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) she 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 her from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) she shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) she shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) the applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) she shall not involve herself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav