1 2026:CGHC:27432 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1014 of 2026 Rupnarayan Ekka S/o Pyara Ekka Aged About 45 Years Occupation - Social Worker, R/o Village Basen, Police Station Kansabel, Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Kunkuri, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Ram Vifal Ram Rajwade, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Government Adv. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this Second Anticipatory Bail application under Section 482 of of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 103/2025, registered at Police Station – Kunkuri, District – Jashpur (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 299 and 353(2) of B.N.S. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. The earlier first anticipatory bail application of the applicant being MCRCA No. 1964/2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 15.12.2025, on merits. Hence, this second anticipatory bail. 3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 13.04.2025, the applicant has posted obscene and derogative messages in social media regarding Hindu Female and thereby disgraced the feelings of Bramhan and Hindu Society. The report to the above effect was lodged by complainant Deepak Mishra, the Chairman of Bramhan Society, Jashpur at Police Station, Kunkuri, where the offence U/s 229, 353(2) of B.N.S. have been registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first anticipatory bail application of the applicant, being MCRCA No. 1964/2025, was rejected by this Court vide order dated 15.12.2025 on merits. Hence, this second anticipatory bail application has been filed on the new ground that while rejecting the earlier application, this Court had observed that after being enlarged on bail in Crime No. 91/2025 by order dated 04.07.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 4392/2025, the applicant had allegedly committed the present offence. It is submitted that the said observation requires reconsideration inasmuch as Crime No. 91/2025 was registered on 30.04.2025, whereas the present Crime No. 103/2025, though registered on 04.05.2025, pertains to an incident alleged to have occurred on 13.04.2025, i.e., prior to the registration of Crime No. 91/2025. It is further submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and that he neither intended to outrage the religious sentiments of any community nor posted any objectionable or 3 obscene material on social media. Learned counsel submits that the applicant is a social worker and an active member of the Bahujan Mukti Party and has been falsely implicated due to political rivalry. It is further contended that the Facebook post in question was merely forwarded to the applicant, who had only "liked" the same and that the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are not attracted. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, it is submitted that only two cases involving similar offences are pending against him, out of which in one case, Crime No. 91/2025, the applicant has already been enlarged on bail. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicant be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the first anticipatory bail application of the applicant, being MCRCA No. 1964/2025, has already been rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated 15.12.2025 and there is no substantial change in the facts and circumstances of the case warranting reconsideration of the same. It is further submitted that the applicant is a habitual offender and, apart from the two criminal cases of similar nature disclosed by the applicant in Part-D of the bail application, he is also involved in one more case of similar nature. Considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant, the nature and gravity of the allegations and the material collected during the course of investigation, it is submitted that no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out and the present application deserves to be rejected. 4 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order passed by the trial Court. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the allegations, the fact that the first anticipatory bail application of the applicant, being MCRCA No. 1964/2025, has already been rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated 15.12.2025 and this Court does not find any substantial change in the facts and circumstances of the case so as to take a different view, also considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant, including one more case of similar nature apart from the cases disclosed by the applicant in Part-D of the present application, which prima facie indicates that the applicant is a habitual offender, this Court is of the opinion that no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out, thus this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the Second anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Rupnarayan Ekka, filed under Section 482 of BNSS involved in Crime No. 103/2025, registered at Police Station – Kunkuri, District – Jashpur (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 299 and 353(2) of B.N.S., is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal