1 CGHC010353012026 2026:CGHC:42455 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1514 of 2026 Pradeep Dubey, Son Of Late Ganesh Dubey Aged About 32 Years Resident Of House No. 1, Block No. 10, P.M. Awas 870, Kachna, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station - Civil Lines, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) --- Respondent (Cause title is taken from CIS system) For Applicant : Mr. Ayush Lall, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Varunendra Mishra, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 29/09/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.451 of 2026 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) under Sections 299 of B.N.S., 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that a written complaint was made by complainant Abhishek Chouhan at Police Station Civil Lines, Raipur alleging that applicant made certain statement during an interaction/interview on a news channel with intent to outrage religious BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN 2 feelings of Hindu community by insulting the Hindu religion and belief, which subsequently went viral on social media platforms. Based on the complaint, Crime No.451 of 2026 is registered against applicant. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant has not committed any offence as alleged. Statement given by applicant in the interview on Janhit Sandesh is not against any person or community or religion. He submits that any statement made can come within the purview of Section 299 of BNS only when the statement is made with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of the community. No such statement has been given. There is no other criminal antecedents against applicant. Hence, applicant may be extended benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant. However, upon putting specific query with regard to previous criminal antecedents, he submits that there is no such mention in the case diary against applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents placed on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegation and submission made by learned counsel for respective parties, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, he shall be released on anticipatory bail by the 3 officer arresting him on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.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 investigating 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. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram