1 CGHC010354372026 2026:CGHC:42206 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1517 of 2026 1 - Yogendra Singh Dhurw S/o Puran Say Aged About 43 Years (Wrongly Men- tioned As Dhruv) Caste Gond, R/o Village Tamta, Tahsil And Police Station - Pathalgaon, District - Jashpur Chhattisgarh 2 - Hukumchand Dhurwe S/o Mahesh Ram Aged About 40 Years (Wrongly Men- tioned As Hukum Dhruwe), Caste Gond, R/o Village Tamta, Tahsil And Police Sta- tion - Pathalgaon, District - Jashpur Chhattisgarh 3 - Dolesh Raj Dhurwe S/o Sadar Sai Dhurve Aged About 34 Years (Wrongly Men- tioned As Doleshwar Ram Dhruv S/o Sadarram) Caste Gond, R/o Village Tamta, Tahsil And Police Station - Pathalgaon, District - Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Pathalgaon, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ...Respondent For Applicants :Mr. Hrishikesh Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent-State :Ms. Avleen Juneja Gambhir, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 28/09/2026 1. Applicants have preferred this application under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail as they apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No. 176/2026 registered at Police Station – Pathalgaon, District Jashpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 75(2), 331(3) & 3(5) of the BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution is that on 16.08.2026, the complainant lodged a report alleging that her neighbour, namely, Doleshwar Dhurwe, used to make inappropriate gestures towards her. It is further alleged that on VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.09.30 11:02:58 +0530 2 16.08.2026, when the complainant was alone at her house, Doleshwar Dhurwe entered her house and attempted to outrage her modesty. Thereafter, he called his brothers, namely, Joge and Hukum, and all three persons allegedly attempted to outrage the modesty of the complainant. Accordingly, the aforesaid report was lodged and the offence was registered against the accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present crime. He further submits that there is a property dispute between the parties and that the wife of applicant No. 2 lodged a report at the concerned police station on 16.08.2026 at about 04:55 p.m., in which offences under Sections 74, 75(2) and 77 of the BNS, Sections 3(1)(w)(i) and 3(2)(v-a) of the SC/ST Act, and Section 12 of the POCSO Act were registered and only to come out with the FIR registered against one Birochan Gupta. He further submits that, only with a view to counter the aforesaid report, the present complaint has been lodged against the applicants as a counterblast at about 07:23 p.m. on the same day. He further submits that the applicants have no criminal antecedents. Therefore, he prays that the applicants be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned State Counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants and submits that serious allegations have been levelled against the applicants. She further submits that when the victim was alone in her house, co-accused Bhuvneshwar Dhurwe called his other brothers, who are also co-accused, and thereafter, all of them committed the alleged offence. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the contents of both the FIRs, i.e., FIR No. 0176 of 2026, in which the applicants apprehend their arrest, and FIR No. 0175 of 2026, lodged by the wife of applicant No. 2. 3 6. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the allegations, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, applicants have no criminal antecedents, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, 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 applicants in connection with the crime in question (176/2026), they shall be released on anticipatory bail by the Officer arresting him on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting Officer. Applicants shall also abide by the following conditions: (i) that the applicants shall make themself available for interrogation before the Investigation Officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicants 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 applicants shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them 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 vaibhav