Chhattisgarh High Court
Criminal LawCriminal Procedure and Evidence

Anticipatory bail granted to applicant accused of naming an uninvolved vehicle in an accident report.

KARAN MUNNA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High CourtJUDGMENT: September 26, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Anticipatory bail granted to applicant accused of naming an uninvolved vehicle in an accident report.. KARAN MUNNA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH. Chhattisgarh High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant’s father was injured in an accident. The applicant reported the incident to the police, allegedly identifying a vehicle that was not involved.

Source reference: para. 1–2

The police subsequently registered Crime No. 88/2026 at Police Station Singhoda, Mahasamund, for offences under Sections 217 and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

Source reference: para. 1–2

The applicant sought anticipatory bail, submitting that he was not present at the accident and had identified the vehicle based on information gathered, not knowingly; the State opposed the application, and no criminal antecedents were recorded in the case diary.

Source reference: para. 3–4
02

Issues

1. Whether the applicant should be granted anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 88/2026, registered for offences under Sections 217 and 318(4) of the BNS

Source reference: para. 1, 6

2. Whether the circumstances warranted conditions governing the applicant’s release and conduct

Source reference: para. 7
03

Law Applied

The application was made under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which provides for anticipatory bail. The Court considered the facts and circumstances, the nature of the allegation, and the parties’ submissions in deciding whether to grant relief.

Source reference: para. 6

The alleged offences were under Sections 217 and 318(4) of the BNS. No precedents were cited, and the order did not set out a more detailed legal test.

Source reference: para. 1–8
04

Reasoning

The Court considered the allegation that the applicant had named a vehicle not involved in the accident, alongside the applicant’s contention that he was not present and had relied on information gathered. It also noted that the State identified no criminal antecedents in the case diary.

Source reference: para. 3–6

Having considered the circumstances, the nature of the allegation, and the parties’ submissions, the Court found anticipatory bail appropriate, without expressing an opinion on the merits.

Source reference: para. 3–6
05

Holding

The Court allowed the application and directed that, in the event of arrest, the applicant be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of ₹25,000 with one surety for the like sum.

The applicant must be available for interrogation when required, must not influence persons acquainted with the case, must not prejudice a fair and expeditious trial, and must appear before the trial Court on each date until disposal of the trial.

Source reference: para. 7

A certified copy was directed to be sent to the trial Court for information and compliance.

Source reference: para. 8
06

Acts & Sections Cited

3 provisions across 2 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 20232

Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

KARAN MUNNAvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High Court · September 26, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment