1 2026:CGHC:22667 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 676 of 2026 Prakhar Marwaha S/o Sumit Marwaha Aged About 27 Years R/o Block A, Flat No. 102, Nechura Apartment, Daldal Sivni, P.S. Pandri District Raipur C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Tikrapara, District- Raipur C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.05.2026 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. 204/2026 registered at Police Station Tikrapara, District- Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 333, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, in brief is that the case is based on a written report lodged by the victim, a private employee, alleging that the present applicant, who was previously known to her as an old RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 friend, forcibly entered her house on 10.02.2026 at about 07:00 PM and, during the said incident, abused her in filthy language and extended threats to her life. It is further alleged that in an earlier incident at her residence at Sai Simran City, the applicant had forcibly entered her house, assaulted her by hands and fists, and also set fire to her scooty bearing registration No. CG-04-NA-2959. The victim further stated that due to fear of the applicant, she did not immediately lodge the report and subsequently disclosed the matter to her friend and thereafter reported the incident to the police. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, Crime No. 204/2026 has been registered at Police Station Pandri, District Raipur, for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 333 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Apprehending arrest in the aforesaid crime, the present applicant has preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case at the instance of the police and that he has no role whatsoever in the commission of the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the actual facts are quite different, inasmuch as the applicant and the complainant were known to each other for the last 4–5 years and were having friendly relations, frequently meeting, communicating and travelling together, and the applicant had also financially assisted the complainant and gifted her various articles, which clearly reflects the nature of their relationship. He further submits that on the date of alleged incident, the applicant was present at his 3 residence as well as at his uncle’s construction site, which can be duly substantiated by cogent evidence. It is also submitted that the applicant has been implicated merely on the basis of apprehension, misunderstanding and misinformation without any supporting material, and that there are no criminal antecedents against him, which shows that he was never involved in any such alleged activities. It is further submitted that the applicant is 27 years of age, is the sole bread earner of his family. Hence, it is prayed that the applicant be granted anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the non - applicant/State, opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the present case is based on a detailed complaint of the victim alleging repeated incidents of forcible entry, assault, abuse and criminal intimidation by the applicant, which are grave in nature and cannot be lightly brushed aside at this stage. It is further submitted that the allegations are supported by specific assertions regarding earlier and subsequent incidents, including damage to property by setting fire to the scooty, which prima facie disclose commission of cognizable and serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. She further submits that the defence taken by the applicant regarding alleged friendly relations and alibi are matters of evidence which require strict proof during trial and cannot be considered at the stage of anticipatory bail. It is also submitted that considering the seriousness of allegations and the conduct attributed to the applicant, custodial interrogation may be necessary for effective 4 investigation. Hence, it is prayed that the application for anticipatory bail be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations levelled against the present applicant, the material available on record as well as the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the present matter arises out of alleged disputes between the applicant and the complainant, who are stated to be known to each other and were allegedly having friendly relations for quite some time, and the defence taken by the applicant suggests existence of prior acquaintance and interaction between the parties. It is also noted that the allegations regarding forcible entry, assault and criminal intimidation are essentially based on version of the complainant and require detailed appreciation of evidence during trial. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and considering that the applicant is stated to have no criminal antecedents and that charge-sheet has already been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Prakhar Marwaha on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting OfÏcer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- 5 (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 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) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan