1 CGHC010347182026 2026:CGHC:39915 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1494 of 2026 1 - Basant Bisen S/o Shubhaschandra Bisen, Aged About 47 Years R/o. Pritam Nagar, Ashok Nagar, Gudhiyari, P. S. Gudhiyari, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gudhiyari, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Applicant : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Sharad Mishra, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board 11/09/2026 1. Applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail as he apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 215/2021 registered at Police Station- Gudhiyari, District Raipur RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.09.16 14:20:54 +0530 2 (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 147, 149, 295 and 295 (A) of IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant namely Shivkumar Thakur is the President of Shiv Hanuman Mandir Public Committee, Tilak Nagar, Janta Colony. On 31.08.2021, at around 11.15 a.m., he was in the temple premises. At the same time, Vedpuri Goswami, Rajkumar Goswami, Raj Sahu, Deepak Sahu, Mohit Pandey, Rajendra Baghel and 10-12 other people from the locality came to the temple premises and unanimously said that they will take away the idol of Shri Sai Baba temple situated in the temple premises and will vandalize it, because he is not our God. He requested that there will be a meeting of the temple committee at 7.00 p.m., come in the evening, but they did not agree and said that they will vandalize the idol of Shri Sai Baba right away. When Vedpuri Goswami and his companions were stopped from doing so, they said that the idol of Shri Sai Baba will not remain in the temple and they will start removing and vandalizing the idol from their locality and instigated their companions by saying this. Then he said that he is the president of this temple committee, he will not allow any vandalism under any circumstances and hugged the idol of Shri Sai Baba and said that even if you kill him, he will not allow the idol of Baba to be broken, but they did not listen and forcibly removed it. With common intention, with malicious intent, broke the idol of Shri Sai Baba installed in the Sai temple situated in the temple premises 3 with stones and hammer. The idol of Shri Sai Baba was broken into pieces and thrown outside the gate and the life size photo behind the idol of Shri Sai Baba was destroyed by burning it outside. The priest of the temple Manoj Krishna Shastri and other people were present at the spot. On getting information about the incident, he informed the treasurer of the temple committee Kishanlal Chindekar, joint secretary Sohanlal Verma and others who were present at the spot and witnessed the incident. In this way, Vedpuri Goswami, Rajkumar Goswami, Raj Sahu, Deepak Sahu, Mohit Pandey, Rajendra Baghel and their 10-12 other companions, acting in unison, entered the temple premises illegally and with malicious intent, broke and shattered the idol of Shri Sai Baba installed in the temple and insulted the religious sentiments of the locality. Thus, the applicant was also implicated in the crime in question. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He contended that the applicant was not involved in this dispute between complainant and co-accused at the time of dispute he only went to take blessing as of everyday when he goes out from the home for work and the applicant is also the devotee of Shri Sai Baba. He also contended that the applicant involved in Social Association and works for his society and Vice president of Rashtriya Swayam Sangh and Vice President of Rashtriya Pawar Kshatriya Mahasabha and member of Rashtriya Pawar Kshatriya 4 Mahasabha Bharat, therefore as suspect the complainant has taken the name of the applicant as he was there while at the time of dispute but the applicant went to temple of Shri Sai Baba to take blessings. His involvement in the crime in question is absolutely false and baseless. There is no other criminal antecedent registered against the applicant. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and on query being made to the learned State counsel, he submits that on the basis of the photographs and videos captured at the time of incident and on the basis of statement of local residents name of applicant has been implicated in the crime in question. Further there is no criminal antecedent registered against the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the documents enclosed along with bail application. 6. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for the parties, without commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to allow this anticipatory bail application. 7. Accordingly, application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant in connection with the crime in question (215/2021), he shall be released on anticipatory bail by 5 the Officer arresting him on his executing a personal bond in the sum of ₹25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting Officer. Applicant shall also abide by the following conditions: (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigation Officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicant 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) that the applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE Ravi Mandavi