1 CGHC010374282026 2026:CGHC:42007 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1592 of 2026 1 - Karan Munna S/o Hemchand Munna Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Chhuipali, Police Station Singhoda, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Singhoda, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Applicant : Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, Advocate For State/Respondent : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board 26/09/2026 1. Applicant has preferred First 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. 88/2026 registered at Police Station- Singhoda, District RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI 2 Mahasamund (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 217 and 318(4) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that father of the applicant met with an accident and suffered injuries. The applicant went to police station and lodged the report with regard to the said incident, however, he implicated another vehicle which is not involved in the incident. After coming to the knowledge of the police authorities the present FIR is registered. Applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with the aforementioned crime number. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent, not involved in alleged commission of offences and he has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. Applicant was not present along with his father at the time of incident, however, the report is lodged implicating the vehicle based on the information gathered, therefore it can not be said that applicant had named the vehicle in his report knowingly. 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 submits that according to the FIR, it is apparent that the applicant has implicated the vehicle which is not involved in the incident and thereby not met the accident. Upon asking learned State counsel with regard to criminal antecedent 3 against the applicant, she submits that there is no mention of criminal antecedent in the case dairy. 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 aforementioned crime number, he shall be released on anticipatory bail by 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. 4 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