1 CGHC010367282026 2026:CGHC:41241 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1546 of 2026 1 - Bhupendra Singh Parihar S/o Late Indrajeet Singh Aged About 57 Years R/o Kanya Parisar Road, Bishunpur, Ambikapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O Police Station - Sitapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Applicant : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board 22/09/2026 1. Applicant has preferred first anticipatory bail 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. 262/2026 registered at Police Station- Sitapur, District RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI 2 Sarguja (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 108 and 3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 25.12.2025, at about 08:00 p.m., a phone call from Bharat Yadav was received on the mobile phone of the deceased, during which the applicant also allegedly threatened the deceased. On the following day, i.e., 26.12.2025, at about 05:00 p.m., the family members found Dinesh Gupta hanging, and he had died. The incident was reported to the police, pursuant to which a crime was registered against five persons, including the applicant. Hence, the present application for anticipatory bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been been falsely implicated in the crime. The applicant was working as the Society Manager and as per allegation the applicant and other persons were pressuring to deposit about an amount of Rs.52,00,000/-. Applicant has not been named in merg. The co-accused Bharat Yadav has been enlarged on bail against whom there was an allegation that just before the death of deceased Dinesh Gupta, co-accused Bharat Yadav has given a call on his mobile phone. He further submits that applicant is an employee of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank and prima facie he is having good case in his favour and if benefit of anticipatory bail not extended to him, the future of the applicant 3 would affect adversely. There is no likelihood of absconding of the applicant and he will participate in the investigation proceedings. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant, however, he do not dispute the submission of the counsel for the applicant that the case of the applicant is almost on similar footing to the co-accused Bharat Yadav who have been enlarged on bail in MCRCA No.1454 of 2026. He also submits that the applicant has been named by the co-accused in the statement recorded under Section 181 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. 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, further considering that the applicant is an employee of the Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank and co-accused Bharat Yadav has been enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 10.09.2026, 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 aforementioned crime number, he shall be released on anticipatory bail by the Officer arresting him on his executing a personal bond in the sum 4 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