1 CGHC010312902026 2026:CGHC:37845 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1390 of 2026 Aditya Patle S/o Sammelal Patle Aged About 28 Years P.S. Hardi Bazar, Tehsil Hardi Bazar District- Korba (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station P.S. Hardi Bazar, Tehsil Hardi Bazar District- Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Ganesh Ram Burman, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.08.2026 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.83/2026 registered at Police Station – Hardi Bazar, Tehsil Hardi Bazar District- Korba (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 3(5), 333 & 117(2) of the BNS. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.25 10:43:38 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution case, in brief, the complainant, namely Sumitra Bai, aged about 64 years, resident of Bhilai Bazar, Police Station Hardibazar, District Korba, lodged a report alleging that on 29.05.2026, at about 1:00 p.m., while she was present in her house along with her daughter Kanti Patle, her neighbour/accused Sammelal Patle, along with his wife and sons, allegedly climbed over the boundary wall of her house. When the complainant objected to the same, the accused persons allegedly abused her in filthy language, threatened her with dire consequences and pelted bricks and stones at her, resulting in injuries near her left ear and on her right cheek. On hearing the commotion, her daughter Kanti Patle came out and tried to pacify the accused persons, whereupon she was also allegedly threatened and sustained an injury on the right side of her neck. Thereafter, the complainant reported the incident at Police Station Hardibazar, pursuant to which FIR No. 83/2026 dated 29.05.2026 was registered against the accused persons for the alleged offences. During investigation, the police collected the relevant evidence and filed the final report in the matter. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case by the complainant, who is stated to be quarrelsome in nature. It is further submitted that neither the FIR nor the final report filed under Section 193 of the BNSS discloses any prima facie material or ingredients of the alleged offences against the applicant, and the investigation has not revealed any previous dispute, scuffle or animosity between the applicant and the complainant or her family members. Learned counsel further submits that although the applicant was named in the FIR, during the 3 alleged incident he was physically present on duty at Dev Mining Ltd. Coal Washery, and the police, finding no evidence against him, have not implicated his name in the final report. It is also submitted that the applicant’s name does not find place as an accused in the charge- sheet, yet the learned Trial Court has issued a bailable warrant of Rs.5,000/- against him, which is without any sufficient basis. It is further submitted that the other accused persons named in the final report have already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 6364/2026 vide order dated 16.07.2026, and therefore, the applicant is also entitled to the benefit of parity. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, there is no likelihood of his absconding, and he is ready to furnish adequate surety and abide by all the terms and conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the anticipatory bail application of the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the dispute, and the material available on record, and further considering the fact that the similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted regular bail in MCRC No. 6364/2026 vide order dated 16.07.2026, and also considering that the applicant was not present at the place of occurrence at the relevant time, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity. Accordingly, without 4 expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to grant 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 – Aditya Patle, on executing a personal bond and one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he 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 from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he shall 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 surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav