DURGA PRASAD DANSENA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010429392026 2026:CGHC:46911
Digitally
signed by
RAVI
SHANKAR
MANDAVI
RAVI
SHANKAR
MANDAVI
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 1834 of 2026
1 - Durga Prasad Dansena S/o Itwar Singh Dansena Aged About 33
Years R/o Barbhouna, Tehsil Kharsiya, Police Station Chal, Distt-
Raigarh (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
Chal, Distt- Raigarh (C.G.)
... Respondent
(Cause title is taken from CIS)
For Applicant : Mr. Sumit Singh Rathore, Advocate
For State/Respondent : Dr. Surendra Dewangan, Panel Lawyer
Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
Order on Board
03/11/2026
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.
195/2026 registered at Police Station- Chal, District Raigarh

2
(C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 119(1),
126(2), 296, 3(5) and 351(3) of BNS.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 06.08.2026 at about
09:00 PM, the complainant, namely Malik Ram Dansena, went to
deliver food to truck drivers near Thakur Devras Gate,
Bharbhouna Road. Thereafter, he was informed by Shatrughan
Vasudev that the accused persons had blocked their truck,
assaulted them, and looted money meant for diesel. When the
complainant reached the spot, the accused persons allegedly
abused and threatened him and thereafter assaulted him and
stabbed him in the stomach with a knife, causing injuries. It is
further alleged that Shekhar Dansena looted Rs.2,200/- from him
and deflated the front wheel of the truck. On the basis of the
complaint, the aforesaid crime was registered against the accused
persons.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has
not committed any offence as alleged and the applicant was
falsely implicated in the crime in question. When the applicant has
filed application for grant of anticipatory bail before the Court
below, the complainant appeared and submitted no objection in
grant of bail to the applicant. One of the co-accused Premlal was
granted anticipatory bail in MCRCA No.1613/2026 vide order
dated 29.09.2026 and another co-accused Shekhar Chand has

3
been enlarged on anticipatory bail by the Court below. Case of the
present applicant is also on similar footing.
4. Learned State counsel oppose the submission of learned counsel
for applicant, however, he do not dispute the submission of
learned counsel for the applicant that one of the co-accused
Premlal has been enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated
29.09.2026.
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,
further considering that the application for grant of anticipatory bail
has been rejected by the learned trial Court only taking into
consideration the one criminal antecedent registered against the
applicant. Other co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail.
Further the complainant has given no objection before the
concerned Court as reflecting from the impugned order, 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

4
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.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
JUDGE
Ravi Mandavi