1 2026:CGHC:18966 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 615 of 2026 Junaid Ahmad S/o Jubair Ahmad, Aged About 39 Years R/o Saket Enclave Duplex -1 Behind Patidaar Bhawan Bilaspur, Tehsil And District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 24.04.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.408/2026, registered at Police Station – Civil Line, Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 333, 119(2), 115(2), 351(2) & 3(5) of the BNS. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.04.25 11:45:02 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that, on 28.03.2026 Dr. Prateek Mohanti lodged FIR at Police Station House Civil Line against the present applicant, his brother Jaid Ahmad, that on 27.03.2026 at about 11:00 PM the complainant along with his friend Shekh Azad where sitting in his house just then the Junaid Ahmad along with his brother Jaid Ahmad and other came their and asked for Rs. 500/- for liquor on which the complainant had given him Rs. 200/-. The Junai Ahmad saying that the complainant is given only Rs. 200/- and begain to abuse him, he told him to come out of house on the ground that he has given small amount and using filthy language committed marpit and he sustained injuries in his person. It was further alleged that during the course of marpit the applicant and his brother were threatening him to kill during that period the complainant lodged his some amount and mobile phone. On which the offence under Section 333, 119(2), 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of in connection with the Crime No. 408/2026 was registered at Police Station Civil Line Bilaspur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has neither committed any offence nor participated in the commission of the alleged crime. It is submitted that the alleged incident did not take place at the house of the complainant at Krintinagar, but rather near Subham Vihar in front of the house of Shekh Azad, where a sudden altercation arose between both parties, leading to a mutual scuffle. It is further submitted that even if the entire prosecution story is accepted, no offence under Section 119(2) of the BNS is made out, as the complainant did not sustain any grievous injury and the injuries, if any, are simple in nature. The FIR has been lodged belatedly and falsely implicates the applicant and his brother, with exaggerated 3 allegations including the presence of other persons who were not present at the spot. It is also submitted that the dispute arose due to prior issues relating to damage caused to the applicant’s vehicle by the complainant in an inebriated condition, and the present case is a result of personal vendetta. The applicant is a respectable businessman, has no criminal antecedents, and resides with his family, and his arrest would cause irreparable harm to his reputation. It is further submitted that the co-accused, namely the applicant’s brother, has already been granted regular bail, and the present applicant stands on similar footing. Nothing is required to be recovered from the applicant, and therefore custodial interrogation is not necessary. The applicant is a permanent resident with no likelihood of absconding, and he is ready to furnish adequate surety and abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court; hence, it is prayed that the applicant be granted the benefit of bail. 4. Learned State Counsel opposes the application and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. It is contended that the applicant, in an intoxicated condition, abused the victim, criminally trespassed into her house, used obscene language and, caught hold of her hand with sexual intent, and threatened to kill her and her husband, besides causing damage to the property, thereby attracting the offences registered under the relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It is further submitted that the delay in lodging the FIR has been properly explained on account of fear and shame, and that witnesses have supported the prosecution case. Therefore, considering the gravity and sexual nature of the allegations, the applicant is not entitled to anticipatory bail. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and the material available on record, the FIR and statements indicate that the applicant, along with co-accused, assaulted the complainant, caused injuries on vital parts of the body, and also committed robbery of his mobile phone and cash while extending threats to kill. The nature of the injuries, including internal injuries to the throat, head, and other parts, reflects the seriousness of the assault. The allegations are grave in nature, supported by prima facie evidence, and the role attributed to the applicant is specific and active. Considering the seriousness of the offence, the manner in which it has been committed, and the possibility of the applicant influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence if released, this is not a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Junaid Ahmad, involved in Crime No.408/2026, registered at Police Station – Civil Line, Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 333, 119(2), 115(2), 351(2) & 3(5) of the BNS, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav