1 CGHC010272292026 2026:CGHC:32361 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1194 of 2026 1 - Sunita Mahant, D/o Kalidas Mahant Aged About 24 Years R/o Village- Dongaghat, Champa Thana Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 2 - Gopal Das Mahant S/o Kalidas Mahant Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Dongaghat, Champa, Thana Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- District- Magistrate, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, P.L. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 28.07.2026 1. This is the first application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by the applicants, who apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No. 155/2026 registered at Police Station Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 119(1), 296, 3(5), 333, and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, on 13.04.2026 at about 9:00 a.m., co-accused Baijudas Mahant allegedly trespassed into the complainant's house and made obscene and sexually coloured remarks to the complainant's sister. When the complainant objected, Baijudas Mahant allegedly assaulted him with fists and caused injuries by pelting bricks and stones. It is further alleged that the present applicants, in furtherance of their common intention, also entered the complainant's house, assaulted the complainant, abused and threatened him, and demanded ₹500 per week for the consumption of liquor, failing which they allegedly threatened to harm the complainant's sister. On the basis of the report, an FIR was registered and the matter was taken up for investigation. During the investigation, co-accused Baijudas Mahant was arrested, whereas the present applicants allegedly absconded and consequently, a charge-sheet was filed against them as absconding accused. 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 the principal allegations are against co-accused Baijudas Mahant, who allegedly threatened the complainant's sister with sexual assault. It is further submitted that the present applicants, being the brother and sister of the co-accused, have merely been implicated on the allegation that they facilitated the commission of the offence. Learned counsel further submits that the applicants have no criminal antecedents. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicants be granted anticipatory bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the offences alleged against the applicants are serious in nature. She fairly submits that the applicants have no criminal antecedents; however, considering their active participation in the commission of the offence, they do not deserve the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is prayed that the application be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the principal allegations are directed against co- accused Baijudas Mahant, who is alleged to have threatened the complainant's sister with sexual assault. So far as the present applicants are concerned, the allegations against them are limited to having allegedly facilitated the commission of the offence by the 4 co-accused. The applicants are stated to be the brother and sister of the main accused and there is no allegation that they themselves extended any threat or committed any overt act constituting the principal offence. It is also noteworthy that the applicants have no criminal antecedents. Considering the nature of the allegations, the role attributed to the present applicants, their clean antecedents and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicants have made out a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed, and it is directed that, in the event of the arrest of the applicants, namely, Sunita Mahant and Gopal Das Mahant, on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, they shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions: (a) The applicants 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 such person from disclosing those facts to the Court. (b) The applicants shall not act in any manner that would be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicants shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed by the said Court till the disposal of the trial. (d) The applicants and the surety shall submit a copy of their Aadhaar Card along with a coloured postcard-size 5 photograph bearing the printed Aadhaar number thereon, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) The applicants shall not involve themselves in any offence of a similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Ruchi