1 2026:CGHC:26370 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 961 of 2026 1 - Sarthak Mishra S/o - Shri Dev Krishna Mishra, Aged About 23 Years Bandhwapara Satbahiniya Mandir Sarkanda P S Sarkanda District- Bilaspur (C.G.) (Wrongly Mention Badhiyapara In Impugned Order) 2 - Sudeep Sashtri S/o- Shri Ramashankar Sashtri, Aged About 22 Years R/o- Village Baima P S Sarkanda Tah. And Distt. Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ...Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - S H O Koni Bilaspur, District-Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.06.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 508/2025 registered at Police Station – Koni Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.06.30 10:49:12 +0530 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 127(2),191(2) & 332(c) of the BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Complainant Seema Rai appeared at Koni Police Station on October 26.10.2025, (wrongly mention 2026 in impugned order) and submitted a written application to lodge a report stating that on 26.10.2025, at 6:30 PM, NSUI State President Neeraj Pandey, along with Lucky Mishra, Sudeep Shastri, Sarthak Mishra, and approximately 30 other unidentified individuals, broke the lock on the university's main gate and forcibly entered the premises. Subsequently, they forcibly pushed open the door to the Vice-Chancellor's residence-breaking its lock in the process and entered the residence by force. This sequence of events created an unsafe situation; fearing for their safety, the Vice-Chancellor and other family members were unable to leave the residence. Furthermore, a large number of students, teachers, and staff present on the campus were terrified by this aggressive and unruly mob, resulting in an atmosphere of extreme insecurity and fear. There was also an apprehension that a serious untoward incident might occur. Evidence regarding the incident, including photographs and videos, is enclosed on a pen drive. A case was registered based on the complainant's report, and investigation proceedings were initiated. During the investigation, the statements of the complainant and witnesses were recorded. Accused individuals Sudeep Shastri and Sarthak Mishra were repeatedly contacted on their mobile numbers (7828554946 and 6260127206) and asked to appear at the police station, but neither has done so. 3 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that no specific overt act has been attributed to the applicants and that their names have been mentioned in the complaint only because they are student leaders who had raised objections before the University on behalf of the students. It is further submitted that the investigating agency has failed to collect any cogent or legally admissible material connecting the applicants with the alleged offence and, even if the prosecution case is accepted at its face value, no specific allegation is made out against them. The applicants are permanent residents of the addresses mentioned in the cause title, there is no likelihood of their absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence or influencing the witnesses, and they are ready and willing to furnish adequate sureties and abide by all such terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court while granting anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the anticipatory bail application of the applicants. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for both parties, the nature of the dispute, and the material available on record, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. 4 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants – Sarthak Mishra & Sudeep Sashtri, on executing a personal bond and one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) They 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) they shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) they 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 applicants 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) they shall not involve themself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav