Anticipatory bail is warranted where a co-accused’s memorandum is the sole incriminating material.

On 27 February 2026, two vehicles—a Maruti Brezza and a Hyundai Venue—parked near the complainant’s residence were allegedly set on fire at approximately 2:10 a.m. by unknown persons acting pursuant to a conspiracy, causing an estimated loss of ₹10–12 lakh.

Crime No. 157/2026 was registered at Police Station Dindayal Nagar, Raipur, for offences under Sections 326(f), 326(g), 238(k), 261(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The applicant sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, asserting that he had been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Limesh Kumar Thakur and had no criminal antecedents.

The State opposed the application, alleging that the co-accused’s statement implicated the applicant in setting the vehicles on fire, and further stating that the applicant had been absconding. However, the State conceded that the case diary disclosed no criminal antecedents against him.

Whether the applicant, who apprehended arrest in connection with the alleged vehicle-burning offence, was entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Whether anticipatory bail could be granted where the only material connecting the applicant with the alleged offence was the memorandum statement of a co-accused and no criminal antecedents were disclosed.

The Court applied Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which empowers the High Court to grant anticipatory bail to a person apprehending arrest for a non-bailable offence.

The alleged offences were under Sections 326(f), 326(g), 238(k), 261(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

In exercising its discretion, the Court considered the nature of the allegations, the available connecting material, the applicant’s criminal antecedents, and the requirement that anticipatory bail be subject to safeguards protecting the investigation and trial.

The Court found that, apart from the memorandum statement of co-accused Limesh Kumar Thakur, the case diary contained no other material connecting the applicant with the alleged burning of the two vehicles.

Although the State alleged that the applicant had absconded, it confirmed that he had no criminal antecedents.

Considering the nature of the allegations and the limited material against the applicant, the Court exercised its discretion under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in his favour, while expressly refraining from commenting on the merits of the prosecution case.

The Court directed that, in the event of the applicant’s arrest, Ashutosh Verma be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing one local surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.

The relief was subject to conditions prohibiting interference with witnesses or the fairness of the trial, requiring appearance before the trial court on every date, requiring submission and verification of Aadhaar and photograph documents, and prohibiting involvement in similar offences in future.