1 2026:CGHC:1172 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 31 of 2026 Rajendra Patel S/o Shri Gyan Lal Patel, Aged About 25 Years R/o Ward No. 15, Kotadabri, P.S. Champa, Dist. Janjgir-Champa, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. P.S. Janjgir, Dist. Janjgir Champa, C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulabani, Panel Lawyer and Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.01.2026 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 840/2025 registered at Police Station - Janjgir, District - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 191 (2), 191 (3), 308 (2), 296, 351 (2), 109 (1), 111 (1) of BNS (147, 148, 384, 294, 506 307 of I.P.C. and organized crime (newly inserted)) and section 25 of Arms Act. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant Laxmi Prasad Yadav lodged the complaint on 09.09.2025 stating that on 09.09.2025 at 2 about 07:00 P.M. he went to meet his aunt at Bhatapara (C.G.) along with his family members, at the time the applicant called in his mobile and told him that you are involved in the business of Sand and Crusher Stone, but not giving the commission and if you do not give the commission then he will also start the business of sand, thereafter he cut the phone call, that at about 9 PM when he was returning to his home, the present applicant, Satish @ Bata, Balli @ Pranjal and 20-25 other co-accused with common intention came in car and motor cycle with wooden sticks, swords and hockey sticks, and by using filthy language against the complainant started to beat him and also threatened to kill him, subsequently the co-accused Satish @Bata caused the injury in his neck with sword, that the complainant raised alarm, then the other villagers came on the spot and stopped the quarrel. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the allegation against the applicant is that he allegedly called the complainant and demanded extortion money on the ground that the complainant was engaged in illegal mining activities. However, learned counsel submits that there is no call detail record (CDR) to establish that any such conversation took place or that any phone call was made by the applicant to the complainant. It is further submitted that the FIR was registered against three named persons and other unknown persons. The two other named accused were arrested and have already been granted bail by the learned Trial Court. With regard to the criminal antecedents of the applicant, it is submitted that there are eight previous cases registered against him, out of which, except one, all have been disposed of. In view of the above submissions, learned counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application. They further submits that the applicant had made a call demanding money from the complainant; but could not dispute the fact that there is no evidence on record to show that the applicant made any such call. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations leveled against the applicant, and the fact that there is no call detail record (CDR) to establish that any such conversation took place or that any phone call was made by the applicant to the complainant, further the FIR was registered against three named persons and other unknown persons and two named accused persons were arrested and have already been granted bail by the learned Trial Court, with regard to the criminal antecedents of the applicant, there are eight previous cases registered against him, out of which, except one, all have been disposed of, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in the present case. 7. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Rajendra Patel 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) 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 his 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. 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)The Applicant shall not involved himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Preeti