1 CGHC010282982026 2026:CGHC:32083 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1181 of 2026 Priyanshu Basu Raj @ Basu Kumar S/o Late Mr. Ashish Kumar Sinha Aged About 25 Years (Correct Name) R/o Village Badoniya, P.S. Sangrampur, District Munger (Bihar), Current R/o Rungta Engineering College, Kohka, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Supela (Police Chauki Smriti Nagar), District Durg Chhattisgarh ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. S.C. Verma, Sr. Advocate along with Ms. Pooja Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.07.2026 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.35/2026 registered at Police Station - Supela District - Durg (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 109,115(2), 296, 351(3) & 3(5) of the BNS. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.28 12:14:14 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 09.01.2026, at about 12:30 a.m., the complainant, Hritik Prasad Gupta, along with his friend Rishabh Raj, was returning to his hostel after study from his paying guest accommodation. It is alleged that when they reached near Balaji Hostel, Road No. 2, Saket Nagar, Kohka, they were intercepted by the accused persons, namely Arnav @ Sonu Yadav, Aman Saw, Rishabh Tiwari, and the present applicant, on account of a previous dispute. It is further alleged that the accused persons abused, threatened, and assaulted the complainant. On the basis of the complaint lodged by Hritik Prasad Gupta, FIR/Crime No. 35/2026 was registered at Police Station Supela (Chowki Smriti Nagar), District Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, against the accused persons, including the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is a 25-year-old B.Tech student at Rungta Engineering College, Bhilai, District Durg, having a clean and unblemished record with no criminal antecedents, and his arrest would seriously prejudice his education and future career. It is further submitted that there is no likelihood of the applicant absconding or evading the process of law, as he is a permanent resident and is pursuing his studies regularly. Learned counsel further submits that the co-accused Rishabh Kumar Tiwari has already been granted regular bail by this Hon'ble Court, while the other co-accused, namely Aman Kumar Yadav @ Aman Sethiya and Sonu Kumar Yadav @ Arnav, have been granted bail by the learned Sessions Court, Durg. It 3 is also submitted that no specific overt act has been attributed to the present applicant in the FIR and that the principal allegations are against the other co-accused. The investigation against the co- accused has already been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed, therefore no custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. It is further submitted that the trial is likely to take considerable time, as there are 27 prosecution witnesses and none has been examined so far. The applicant belongs to a respectable family, has deep roots in society, undertakes to cooperate with the investigation, is ready to furnish adequate surety, and there is no likelihood of his tampering with the prosecution evidence or influencing the witnesses. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicant be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposed the anticipatory bail application and submitted that there are specific allegations against the present applicant in the FIR regarding his active participation in the incident. It is further submitted that the investigation is still in progress, custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary, and grant of anticipatory bail at this stage may hamper the investigation. Accordingly, learned State Counsel prayed for rejection of the anticipatory bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the rival submissions, the case diary, and the material available on record, this Court finds that the present applicant is specifically named in the FIR and specific allegations have been 4 made against him. Though the co-accused have been granted regular bail, the present application is for anticipatory bail, which is to be considered on different principles. Since the investigation is still in progress and considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Priyanshu Basu Raj @ Basu Kumar, involved in Crime No.35/2026 registered at Police Station - Supela District - Durg (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 109,115(2), 296, 351(3) & 3(5) of the BNS, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav