1 CGHC010156232026 2026:CGHC:39559 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1065 of 2026 1. Abhishek Andani S/o Suresh Andani Aged About 23 Years Present Address- Street -4 Near Jain Mandir Ward No. 23 Fafadih Raipur (C.G.) Post Raipur Police Station Ganj Tehsil And District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2. Tarique Anwar Khan S/o Muzaffar Khan Aged About 24 Years Present Address Mig D- 81 Devendra Nagar Sector- 1 Shiv Mandir Raipur (C.G.) Post Raipur Police Station Devendra Nagar, Tehsil And District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3. Sanskar Pandey S/o Dinesh Pandey Aged About 22 Years Present Address Gogaon Ward No. 3 Surya Nagar, Near Old Water Tank Raipur (C.G.) Post Raipur Police Station Bhanpuri Tehsil And District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 4. Md. Atik Memon S/o Asif Memon Aged About 26 Years Present Address House No. 1400 Ruprella Street Raman Mandir Ward Fafadih Raipur (C.G.) Post Raipur Police Station Ganj Tehsil And District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 5. Prince Vaishnani S/o Bipin Vaishnani Aged About 25 Years Present Address House No. 12/854 Momasa Fancy Store Fafadih Kumharipara Raipur (C.G.) Post Raipur Police Station Ganj Tehsil And District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 6. Dinesh Mishra S/o Krishna Mishra Aged About 35 Years Present Address Kota Near Ram Darbar Gate Gudhyari Road Raipur (C.G.) Post Raipur Police Station Gudhyari Tehsil And District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 7. Prabhakar Jha S/o Sadanand Jha Aged About 29 Years Present Address Sector- 2 Street No. 6, Professor Colony Raipur (C.G.) Post Raipur Police Station Purani Basti Tehsil And District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 8. Kunal Dubey S/o Pradeep Kumar Dubey Aged About 24 Years Present Address House No. B 15 Ward No. 46 Maruti Residency Amlidih Raipur SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2026.09.10 16:41:25 +0530 2 (C.G.) Post Raipur Police Station Rajendra Nagar Tehsil And District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ... Appellants (s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Saraswati Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant (s) : Ms. Sejal Makkad, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddharth Sharma, Advocate For the State : Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board. 09.09.2026 1. This appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short, 'Act of 1989') is filed against impugned rejection order dated 04.04.2026 (Annexure A-1) passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Raipur, (CG) whereby the appellants’ filed application for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected. 2. Appellants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 226/2025 registered at Police Station - Saraswati Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 221 & 132 of the BNS and Sections 3(2)(VA) of the Act of 1989. 3. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 19.09.2025, complainant Tanuja Salem, who is a member of a Scheduled Caste and was working as District Sports Officer, Department of Sports and Youth Welfare, Government of Chhattisgarh, was performing her official duties at her office located at Raipur. Around 1:00 PM, the accused 3 Bhavesh Shukla without any prior permission, entered her government office along with his associates and introduced himself as a member of the NSUI (National Students' Union of India) and, thereafter, he and his companions started creating ruckus and disturbance in the office, they misbehaved with the complainant and used caste-based abusive words with the intent to insult and humiliate her in public view, they threatened her to remove her from her post and pushed her subordinate staff, attempting to create obstruction in her official work. The accused and his associates continued using filthy and derogatory caste remarks and after being stopped by others present, left the office premises. Based on her written complaint, FIR was registered against the accused persons. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the impugned rejection order is contrary the law and facts and same has been passed without properly appreciated of facts and without considering the provision of the law. She would further submit that the appellants have been falsely implicated in this case, they have not committed any offence as alleged against them. She would further submit that co-accused has already been granted anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court in CRA No. 2158 of 2025 on 18.11.2025, therefore, the appellants may also be granted benefit of anticipatory bail. 5. Learned counsel for the Objector raised no objection in granting anticipatory bail to the appellants. 6. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the appellants and would submit that 4 the appellant No. 5 Prince Vaishnani, appellant No. 6 Dinesh Mishra and appellant No. 7 Prabhakar Jha have no past criminal antecedents and Appellant No.1 Abhishek Andani, Appellant No.2 Tarique Anwar Khan, Appellant No. 3 Sankar Pandey, Appellant No. 4 Md Atik Menon and Appellant No. 8 Kunal Dubey have past antecedents. She would further submit that there is prima-facie, some material against the appellants, therefore, they would not be granted benefit of anticipatory bail and would pray for rejection of the bail application. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 8. Considering the fact that there is prima-facie material against the Appellant No.1 Abhishek Andani, Appellant No.2 Tarique Anwar Khan, Appellant No. 3 Sankar Pandey, Appellant No. 4 Md Atik Menon and Appellant No. 8 Kunal Dubey as they past antecedents of the same nature, therefore, bail application of appellants No.1,2,3,4 and 8 deserves to be rejected and it is rejected. 9. Further considering the nature of allegation, submissions of counsel for the parties and material evidence available in the case diary, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant No. 5 Prince Vaishnani, appellant No. 6 Dinesh Mishra and appellant No. 7 Prabhakar Jha as they have no past criminal antecedents. 10. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Impugned rejection order Annexure A-1 is set-aside and it is directed that in the event of arrest of appellant No. 5 Prince Vaishnani, appellant No. 6 Dinesh 5 Mishra and appellant No. 7 Prabhakar Jha in connection with crime in question (Crime No.226/2025) registered at PS -Saraswati Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.), they shall be released on bail by the officer arresting them on executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- respondent No. 5,6 and 7 with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Arresting Officer. Appellant No. 5,6, and7 shall also abide by following conditions;- (I) that appellant No. 5, 6 and 7 shall make themselves available for interrogation before the investigating officer as and when required; (ii) that appellant No. 5, 6 and 7 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) that appellant No. 5, 6 and 7 shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that appellant No. 5, 6 and 7 shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (v) that appellant No. 5, 6 and 7 shall not leave the country without prior permission from the concerned Court. (vi) Other condition of Section 482(2) of the BNSS shall be imposed upon the appellant Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Santosh