1 2026:CGHC:21454 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 693 of 2026 Sanau Ram Gota S/o Raesingh Gota Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Tumasnar, Post And Tahsil Aamabeda, District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Aamabeda, District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh ---- Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Kishore Narayan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.05.2026 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 ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.05.08 20:02:09 +0530 2 Crime No.17/2025 registered at Police Station- Aamabeda, District – Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 296, 115(2), 351(3), 118(2) of BNSS, 2023. 2. That, as per the prosecution case as unfolded from the FIR, on 18.12.2025, the complainant Hirau Ram Salam, resident of Village Badetevda, Aamabeda, appeared at Police Station Aamabeda and lodged a written report stating that he is the village Patel of Village Aamabeda. It is alleged that on 17.12.2025, he along with other villagers had gone to meet the family members of deceased Chamraram to object that the dead body of Chamraram had been buried as per Christian religious rituals without obtaining consent of the villagers, whereas according to them, the burial ought to have been conducted as per village customs in the designated burial ground of the village. It is further alleged that upon this, the members of the deceased’s family along with a group of persons belonging to the Christian community and members associated with Bhim Army Bastar region, acting in furtherance of common intention, abused the complainant and accompanying villagers in filthy language, assaulted them with sticks, and also extended threats 3 to kill them. Consequently, the present offence has been registered. 3. That the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the co-accused in the same case has already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 20.04.2026 passed in MCRCA No. 583/2026, and the case of the present applicant stands on identical footing, hence he is entitled to the benefit of parity. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has not been filed till date and the investigation is still pending. The applicant is a permanent resident of the area and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with evidence. Therefore, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the allegations against the applicant are grave in nature involving assault and criminal intimidation in furtherance of common intention against villagers. It is further submitted that the investigation is still in progress and charge-sheet has not yet been filed, therefore custodial interrogation of the applicant may be necessary for proper collection of evidence. The State submits that the role of 4 each accused is distinct and parity with co-accused cannot be claimed as a matter of right without considering individual involvement. It is also apprehended that release of the applicant at this stage may prejudice the ongoing investigation and affect the witnesses. Hence, it is prayed that the bail application be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations, material available on record and the fact that the dispute arises out of an incident relating to burial of a deceased person and subsequent altercation between two groups, it appears that the role attributed to the present applicant is required to be examined in the light of evidence collected during investigation. It is not in dispute that the co-accused in the same case has already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 20.04.2026 passed in MCRCA No. 583/2026, and the case of the present applicant stands on identical footing. It is further evident that the charge- sheet has not been filed till date and the investigation is still pending, however, there is no material at this stage to indicate 5 that custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary. In view of the principle of parity and considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to allow the application. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Sanau Ram Gota, on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting OfÏcer, 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. (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/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Arpan