ANIRUDH TAMRAKAR vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010426392026 2026:CGHC:46986
NAFR
Digitally
signed by
RAVI
SHANKAR
MANDAVI
RAVI
SHANKAR
MANDAVI
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 1875 of 2026
1 - Anirudh Tamrakar S/o. Shri Pramod Tamrakar, Aged About 39 Years
R/o. 143, Jawahar Nagar, Durg, Tehsil And Dist. Durg, C.G. (Particulars
Of The Applicant Are Mentioned Correctly)
... Applicant
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mohan Nagar, Tehsil
And District Durg, C.G. (Name Of The Respondent Wrongly Mentioned
In The Order Impugned)
... Respondent
(Cause title is taken from CIS)
For Applicant : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate
For State/Respondent : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, Panel Lawyer
Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
Order on Board
05/11/2026
1. Applicant has preferred first bail application under Section 482 of
Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory

2
bail as he apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.
691/2026 registered at Police Station- Mohan Nagar, District Durg
(C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 74, 78 and 126(2) of
BNS.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 23.09.2026
complainant/victim has lodged a written complaint before the
police authorities stating that she is the resident of Durg and it is
alleged in the complaint that for past 7-8 months present applicant
is continuously stalking her, making filthy gestures and tries to
enter her house wherever she is alone. That it is further alleged
that on 14.09.2026 when complainant/victim was heading to her
house in 2 wheeler the present applicant intervened her near Y'
shape bridge and sexually assaulted her upon resisting the
present applicant threatened her for dire consequences after
which she escaped the scene and went to her house. It is further
alleged by the complainant/victim that few months back also the
applicant came to her house in Martui Zen with black tint and
threatened her. But this time he has assaulted her therefore she
wants action from the police authorities. On the basis of the
complaint, the aforesaid crime was registered against the accused
person.
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. He also pointed out the

3
allegation is that the applicant had stopped the complainant/victim
under the ‘Y’ shape bridge and has tried to outrage her modesty,
which is not possible as it is a public place.
4. Learned State counsel oppose the submission of learned counsel
for applicant and submits that according to the compliant, the
applicant is stopping the complainant/victim since last many
months and on the date of incident i.e. 14.09.2026, he obstructed
in front of the 2 wheeler vehicle of the complainant and thereafter,
he has tried to outrage her modesty and upon screening he ran
away. There is one criminal antecedent against the applicant.
Upon putting query to the learned counsel for the State as to
whether in the complaint there is mention that on the screening
any other person passing or moving on the said road has come to
her rescue, he submits that there is no such mention.
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 place of incident is a public place,
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

4
crime number, he shall be released on anticipatory bail by the
Officer arresting him on his executing a personal bond in the sum
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