1 CGHC010320172026 2026:CGHC:38434 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1357 of 2026 Chhatrapal Chandra S/o Shri Sundar Lal Chandra Aged About 27 Years Age Wrongly Mentioned In Annexure A/1 R/o Arsiya Jaijaipur, P.S. Jaijaipur, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Champa, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Shahil Singh, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. HON'BLE SHRI RAMESH SINHA, CHIEF JUSTICE ORDER ON BOARD 31.08.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for anticipatory bail to the applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 186/2026 registered at Police Station: Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 308(2), 3(5) of BNS SAURABH YADAV Digitally signed by SAURABH YADAV Date: 2026.09.02 17:09:46 +0530 2 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Vinay Kumar Bajpai, Manager at Prakash Industries, Champa, lodged a written report on 28.04.2026 alleging that between 17.04.2026 and 27.04.2026, an unknown person using mobile number 7771054459 sent obscene and abusive WhatsApp messages to his wife, threatened to circulate obscene videos, demanded Rs.2,50,000/- and 2 kg of gold, and further threatened to kill his son and dispose of the body in the Hanumandhara river if the demand was not met. During investigation, the CDR of the said mobile number was obtained, and its subscriber, Rahul Bareth, disclosed that he had provided access to his WhatsApp account to accused Janki Sidar. It was further revealed that accused Janki Sidar, in conspiracy with co-accused Bhumika Chandra and Chhatrapal Chandra, allegedly used the said WhatsApp account to send abusive messages, criminally intimidate the complainant's family, and attempt to extort money and gold. Accordingly, a crime was registered and investigation was undertaken. Hence, this anticipatory bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that there is no evidence on record to 3 establish the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence. Learned counsel also submits that the co-accused persons, namely, Janki Sidar, has already been enlarged on regular bail vide order dated 20.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 6397 of 2026, and Bhumika Chandra has also been enlarged on regular bail vide order dated 09.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4705 of 2026. It is, therefore, submitted that the case of the present applicant stands on the same footing as that of the co-accused persons and, on the ground of parity, the applicant may also be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. It is alleged that the applicant, in conspiracy with the co-accused persons, was involved in sending obscene and abusive messages, extending threats to the complainant and his family, and demanding Rs.2,50,000/- and 2 kg of gold. Learned State counsel further submits that during investigation, the CDR of the concerned mobile number was obtained and the subscriber disclosed that access to his WhatsApp account had been provided to co-accused Janki Sidar. The investigation further revealed the involvement of the co- accused persons in the alleged conspiracy. It is submitted 4 that the co-accused Janki Sidar and Bhumika Chandra, who have been granted bail, are both female accused persons, and therefore, the applicant cannot claim parity merely on the basis of their release on bail. It is further submitted that the investigation is still in progress and custodial interrogation of the applicant may be necessary. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, learned State counsel prays for rejection of the anticipatory bail application. 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, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the material available on record, this Court finds that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. The prosecution has alleged that the applicant was involved in a conspiracy with the co-accused persons in sending obscene and abusive messages, extending threats to the complainant and his family, and demanding Rs.2,50,000/- and 2 kg of gold. The material collected during investigation prima facie indicates the involvement of the accused persons in the alleged offence. The investigation is still in progress and the possibility of requiring the applicant 5 for custodial interrogation cannot be ruled out at this stage. So far as the plea of parity is concerned, the co-accused persons who have been granted bail are female accused persons and their cases were considered on their own facts and circumstances; therefore, the applicant cannot claim parity as a matter of right. Having regard to the seriousness of the allegations, the stage of investigation, and the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present application is liable to be and is hereby rejected. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Chhatrapal Chandra involved in Crime No. 186/2026 registered at Police Station: Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 308(2), 3(5) of BNS and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act is hereby rejected. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Saurabh