1 CGHC010393142026 2026:CGHC:43887 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1682 of 2026 1. Aalok Jaiswal S/o Sitaram Jaiswal Aged About 45 Years R/o Purgaon Police Station And Tehsil Bilaigarh, Distt- Sarangarh - Bilaigarh (C.G.) 2. Onkareshwar S/o Radheshyam Aged About 39 Years R/o Purgaon Police Station And Tehsil Bilaigarh, Distt- Sarangarh - Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Applicants versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Bilaigarh, Distt- Sarangarh - Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sumit Singh Rathore, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Avinash Singh, Government Advocate For Objector : Ms. Khusboo Dua, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 09/10/2026 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.175/2026 registered at Police Station Bilaigarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Digitally signed by SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI 2 under Sections 318 (3), 318 (4), 319, 336 (3), 338, 339, 340, 61 (2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. 2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged written report in concerned police station alleging that complainant is in possession of the land bearing Khasra No.9 area 0.924 hectare situate in village Purgaon. Accused persons have prepared affidavit with forged signature of the complainant, submitted the same before the revenue Court and got the land mutated in the name of one Nilansh Jaiswal. Based on aforementioned allegations, instant crime is registered against the applicants and other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for applicants would submit that applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in crime in question. Applicants have been made accused in instant crime only because they signed the alleged forged affidavit of the complainant as a witnesses. Applicants are the first offender, they are ready to co- operate with the Police in investigation and also to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court while granting anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes submissions of learned counsel for applicant and submits that forged affidavit in the name of complainant and one 3 Ramkumari was prepared and forged signature on the affidavit have been verified by the present applicants as witnesses. Applicants are family members of the complainant and beneficiaries named therein. 5. Ms. Dua, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Objector also opposes bail application and adopts the arguments advanced by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. On due consideration of the submission of learned counsel for respective parties; nature of allegations and further considering the forged document in which applicants are shown as witnesses, I am not inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge roshan/-