1 CGHC010297602026 2026:CGHC:34238 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C(A) No.1268 of 2026 Jyotish Kumar S/o Hemlal Kashyap Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Negurdih, P.S. Nawagarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Nawagarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. G.A. For Complainant : Mr. Gourav Singhal, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 05.08.2026 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the Applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.08.06 15:14:14 +0530 2 with Crime No.82/2026 registered at Police Station – Nawagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 191(2), 191(3) and 109 of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Jagram Kashyap, lodged a written report at Police Station Nawagarh alleging that on 02.03.2026 at about 10:00 p.m., he received a phone call from Sammelal @ Nanu, informing him that his son, Aman Kashyap, had been assaulted by the residents of Village Negurdih on account of previous enmity and was lying unconscious. Upon reaching the spot, the complainant found his son lying unconscious and while he was attempting to lift him, the present Applicant, along with co-accused Sharad Kashyap, Mahendra Kashyap, Gautam, Surendra, Bhuru, Manju Yadav, Vikas Kashyap, Tiharu and others, allegedly arrived at the spot armed with rods, sticks and a tangi. It is alleged that they abused the complainant in filthy language and acting in furtherance of their common intention and with the intention to kill, assaulted him. Co-accused Bhuru allegedly attacked the complainant with a tangi, while co- accused Sharad, Mahendra, Tiharu and Vikas assaulted him with iron rods and the remaining accused persons assaulted him with sticks, causing injuries to his head, as a result of 3 which he fell unconscious. Believing him to be dead, all the accused persons fled from the spot. Thereafter, the complainant regained consciousness and was taken by his family members for medical treatment. The incident is stated to have been witnessed by Sokhilal Sahu and Sammelal, who informed the complainant's family members. Based on these allegations, the offences as mentioned above have been registered against the present Applicant. Hence, this application. 3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the Applicant has not committed the alleged offence and has been roped in without any specific overt act attributable to him. It is further submitted that the Applicant had merely intervened in the dispute between the other accused persons and the injured and did not participate in the alleged assault. It is also submitted that a counter FIR bearing Crime No.81/2026 was registered against the complainant party and subsequently, both the parties amicably settled their dispute by executing a compromise deed dated 19.03.2026. It is further submitted that the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature as per the medical report. It is also submitted that co- 4 accused Goutam Yadav has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No.5065/2026, while co-accused Sanjay @ Bhuru, Tiharum Kashyap, Sharad Kumar Kashyap and Mahendra Kashyap have also been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No.5417/2026. It is further submitted that another co- accused, Surendra Kumar Kashyap, has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 20.07.2026 passed in MCRCA No.1132/2026. It is lastly submitted that the accused persons in the counter case have also been granted regular and anticipatory bail by this Court and therefore, on the ground of parity, the present Applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the application and submits that the present Applicant is a named accused in the FIR and has actively participated in the incident along with the other co-accused persons. It is submitted that the accused persons, forming an unlawful assembly and armed with deadly weapons, assaulted the complainant party with the intention to kill, causing injuries to the complainant. It is further submitted that having regard to the gravity and seriousness of the allegations, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out and therefore, the 5 application deserves to be rejected. However, learned Counsel appearing for the Complainant submits that in view of the compromise deed executed between the parties, he has no objection if the present Applicant is granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that the accused persons in the counter case have already been granted regular bail as well as anticipatory bail by this Court. 5. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the material available in the case diary, the nature of allegations, the fact that the Applicant is not attributed with any specific overt act except a general allegation of assault, the fact that the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature as per the medical report, the existence of a counter case arising out of the same incident, the compromise arrived at between the parties, the fact that learned Counsel appearing for the Complainant has no objection to the grant of anticipatory bail to the present Applicant, the fact that co-accused Goutam Yadav has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No.5065/2026, co-accused Sanjay @ Bhuru, Tiharum Kashyap, Sharad Kumar Kashyap and Mahendra Kashyap have also been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No.5417/2026 and co-accused Surendra 6 Kumar Kashyap has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 20.07.2026 passed in MCRCA No.1132/2026, as also the fact that the accused persons in the counter case have already been granted regular bail as well as anticipatory bail by this Court on account of the compromise between the parties, the fact that the custodial interrogation of the Applicant does not appear to be necessary, the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion and without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. 6. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the Applicant – Jyotish Kumar, 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) The Applicant/s 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/her/them from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The Applicant/s shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicant/s shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him/her/them by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 7 (d)The Applicant/s and the surety shall submit a copy of his/her/their adhaar card along with a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicant/s shall not involve himself/herself/themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Priya