1 CGHC010296662026 2026:CGHC:34241 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C(A) No.1264 of 2026 Laxman S/o Late Shri Lal Sai (Late Ram Sundar Wrongly Stated In The Impugned Order) Aged About 55 Years Caste- Panika R/o Village- Bansapara Police Out Post- Basdeyi, Police Station - Surajpur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through- SHO Police Out Post- Basdeyi Police Station - Surajpur District- Surajpur (CG) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rishikant Mahobia, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, PL. 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 with Crime No.494/2026 registered at Police Station – SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.08.06 11:43:13 +0530 2 Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296(B), 351(3) and 3(5) of BNS as also under Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Babi Devangan lodged a written report on 09.07.2026 alleging that approximately 47 decimals of agricultural land standing in the name of her son, Deepak Devangan, situated at Village Bansapara, had been under the cultivation of her deceased husband's uncle i.e. the present Applicant who was allegedly attempting to forcibly encroach upon the said land despite its demarcation by the Revenue Authorities on 15.06.2026 in the presence of the R.I., Patwari and police officials. It is alleged that on 09.07.2026 at about 12:30 p.m., when the complainant, accompanied by her daughter Usha and son Sumit, engaged a tractor driven by Akhtar Raza to plough the disputed land, the Applicant arrived at the spot abusing them in filthy language while brandishing a naked sword and asserting that the entire land belonged to him. He allegedly threatened to kill anyone who entered the land and attempted to assault the complainant with the sword, but was restrained by his wife. Thereafter, his sons, Raja Babu and Ashish Devangan, also reached the spot, abused the complainant and extended threats, while the present Applicant also 3 threatened the tractor driver with dire consequences if he did not leave immediately, causing him to flee from the spot. 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 on account of a long-standing civil dispute relating to agricultural land between the parties, who are close relatives. It is contended that Civil Suit No.144A/2015 concerning Khasra No.208 has been pending between the parties for the last ten years and that the complainant had already sold her land bearing Khasra No.208/2 admeasuring 0.24 hectares through a registered sale deed dated 29.12.2023. It is further submitted that on the date of the alleged incident, the complainant party attempted to cultivate the land in possession of the Applicant and when the Applicant objected, the present false criminal case was instituted to exert pressure in the civil dispute. It is submitted that the Applicant neither carried nor used any sword, no offence under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act is made out against him and no assault was committed by him. It is further submitted that the Applicant's sons, Raja Babu Dewangan and Ashish 4 Devangan, were not present at the spot and have also been falsely implicated. It is also submitted that co-accused Raja Babu Dewangan has already been granted regular bail by the learned Trial Court, while co-accused Ashish Devangan has been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Trial Court. It is, therefore, submitted that considering the civil nature of the dispute, the false implication of the Applicant and the parity available with the co-accused, the present Applicant is also entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the application and submits that although the present Applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, he came to the disputed field armed with a sword, threatened the complainant and her family members with dire consequences if they cultivated the land, and attempted to assault the complainant. It is, therefore, submitted that considering the serious nature of the allegations, the Applicant is not entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail and the application deserves to be rejected. 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 dispute between the parties appears to have arisen out of a long-standing civil 5 dispute relating to agricultural land and that Civil Suit No.144A/2015 concerning the disputed property is pending between them, the fact that the Applicant and the complainant are close relatives, the fact that co-accused Raja Babu Dewangan has already been granted regular bail by the learned Trial Court and co-accused Ashish Devangan has been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Trial Court, the principle of parity, absence of criminal antecedents 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 – Laxman, 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. 6 (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