1 2026:CGHC:18139 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 591 of 2026 1 - Uma Shankar @ Tinku Verma S/o Mansingh Verma Aged About 46 Years R/o Village- Boriyakala, Thana Mujgehan, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Sanjay Verma S/o Mansingh Verma Aged About 44 Years R/o Village- Boriyakala, Thana Mujgehan, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.). 3 - Dharmendra Verma S/o Mansingh Verma Aged About 51 Years R/o Village- Boriyakala, Thana Mujgehan, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.). 4 - Upendra Verma S/o Lt. Kanhaiya Lal Verma Aged About 57 Years R/o Village- Boriyakala, Thana Mujgehan, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.). 5 - Tarun Verma S/o Mahendra Verma Aged About 39 Years R/o Village- Boriyakala, Thana Mujgehan, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.). 6 - Gulab Chand Verma S/o Samaru Ram Verma Aged About 58 Years R/o Village- Boriyakala, Thana Mujgehan, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station- Kharora, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Shubham Tripathi, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Anusha Naik, Dy. G.A. ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.04.22 20:09:55 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21/04/2026 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.76/2026 registered at Police Station –Kharora, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 3(5), 351(2), 118(1) and 333 of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, as per the prosecution case, an FIR was lodged by the complainant, Himanshu Verma, stating that on 05.02.2026 at about 9:30 PM, a marriage procession consisting of Tinku Verma, a relative of Medini Verma from Village Boria, Raipur, along with his family members, had come to the house of Bhanu Verma in Village Ganiyari. It is alleged that after the welcome of the marriage procession, while the procession was proceeding, an altercation arose amongst certain members of the wedding party. At that time, the complainant’s nephew, Rakesh Verma, was present at the spot, whereupon his father, Danendra Verma, took him towards the house. The prosecution alleges that members of the wedding party, under a mistaken belief, followed them, started abusing and extending threats to kill, and assaulted Danendra Verma and the complainant with 3 hands and fists. It is further alleged that thereafter Tinku Verma and other members of his family joined the incident and assaulted the complainant’s father, Tok Singh, and elder brother, Hemu Verma. When Aditya Verma and Lekh Ram Sahu intervened to pacify the matter, they were also assaulted. As a result of the incident, the complainant sustained injuries on his chest, neck, and back, while Aditya Verma and Lekh Ram Sahu sustained injuries on their heads. On the basis of these allegations, the FIR has been registered against the present applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated. It is contended that a counter FIR dated 07.02.2026 in Crime No. 80/2026 has been lodged by the applicants’ side, indicating that the complainant was the aggressor and that the incident occurred due to a sudden quarrel during the marriage procession. It is further submitted that the complainant and his companions assaulted the applicants and caused damage to vehicles engaged in the procession. It is also pointed out that applicant No. 2, Sanjay Verma, has recently undergone a hernia operation and is under medical treatment, and his arrest may adversely affect his health. It is further contended that the complaint has been lodged due to personal enmity arising out of a local election dispute. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicants are permanent residents, there is no 4 likelihood of their absconding or tampering with evidence, and they are ready to cooperate with the investigation and abide by all conditions imposed by this Court, hence, the present applicants are also entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicants are specifically named in the FIR and have actively participated in the assault, causing multiple injuries to the complainant and other persons, which is supported by medical evidence. It is further contended that although most of the offences are bailable, the offence under Section 333 of the BNS is non-bailable, and therefore, considering the gravity of the allegations, the applicants are not entitled to grant anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, particularly that the incident appears to have arisen out of a sudden quarrel during a marriage procession that a counter FIR has also been lodged indicating a case and counter-case that the applicants are permanent residents with no likelihood of absconding or tampering with evidence and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that custodial interrogation of 5 the applicants are not warranted at this stage, therefore, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant No.1- Uma Shankar, applicant No.2 – Sanjay Verma, applicant No.3- Dharmendra Verma, applicant No.4- Upendra Verma, applicant No.5- Tarun Verma, applicant No.6- Gulab Chand Verma, on executing a personal bond and one surety each respectively in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The applicant 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) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of their 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) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Arpan