1 CGHC010257702026 2026:CGHC:28248 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1055 of 2026 Jagdish Shadani S/o Lakshman Das Shadani Aged About 47 Years R/o - House No. 22/4, Ward No. 27, Sindhi Colony, Station Road, Durg Tehsil And District- Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Anda, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Sr. Advocate with Shri Siddharth Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Shri SS Baghel, GA. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08/07/2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.63/2026 registered at Police Station – Anda, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318 (4) and KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.07.09 15:03:02 +0530 2 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and under Section 63 of the Copyright Act. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the concerned Police has received information that fake Sitar Gutkha is being prepared at the godown situated at village Anda, District Durg and packaging of the same is done in the name of Sitar Company because of which loss is caused to Sitar Company and wrongful gain is being earned by the manufacturer. Upon search, total items amounting to Rs.85,500/- including pouch manufacturing machine amounting to Rs.60,000/- was seized from the said godown. Thereafter FIR was registered. 3. Learned Senior counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that some of the persons who were making duplicate Gutkha have also been made accused. So far as present applicant is concerned, the applicant was supplying raw material and the FIR has not been lodged by the persons who were associated with Sitar Company. He further submits that the applicant is neither partner of the manufacturing unit nor owned the raided godown. Therefore, the applicant may be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the 3 documents taken on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the applicant was supplying raw material to Sitar Company and the FIR has not been lodged by the persons who were associated with the said company, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Jagdish Shadani, 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) He should 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 should not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he should 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 sureties 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 should not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Barve