Chhattisgarh High Court
Criminal LawCriminal Procedure and Evidence

Anticipatory bail was granted on parity after co-accused in the same case were enlarged on bail.

SANJU YADAV vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High CourtJUDGMENT: September 29, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Anticipatory bail was granted on parity after co-accused in the same case were enlarged on bail.. SANJU YADAV vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH. Chhattisgarh High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, apprehending arrest in Crime No. 277/2026, registered at Police Station Purani Bhilai for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the Chhattisgarh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990.

Source reference: para. 1

The prosecution alleged that vehicles were carrying iron scrap from the Bhilai Steel Plant without authority.

Source reference: para. 2

The applicant submitted that he was an employee of co-accused Himanshu Khandelwal and operated a JCB on his instructions; the State did not dispute that employment and role.

Source reference: para. 3

The parties also informed the Court that several co-accused had been granted anticipatory or regular bail.

Source reference: paras. 3–4
02

Issues

Whether the applicant should be granted anticipatory bail in connection with the alleged offences

Source reference: paras. 1, 5–6

Whether the applicant’s asserted role as a JCB operator, absence of criminal antecedents, and the bail granted to co-accused supported granting anticipatory bail

Source reference: paras. 3–6
03

Law Applied

Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, provides the statutory basis for an application seeking anticipatory bail.

Source reference: para. 1

The Court considered the facts and circumstances, the nature of the allegations, the parties’ submissions, and the fact that other co-accused had been granted bail when deciding whether to grant relief.

Source reference: para. 6

No precedent or further legal test was cited in the order.

Source reference: no citation
04

Reasoning

The Court considered the applicant’s claimed subordinate role as an employee and JCB operator, which the State did not dispute, alongside the submission that he had no criminal antecedents.

Source reference: paras. 3–4

It also took account of the bail granted to several co-accused. On those circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court found it appropriate to allow the application.

Source reference: para. 6
05

Holding

The Court allowed the anticipatory-bail application.

It directed that, in the event of arrest in connection with the crime in question, the applicant be released on a personal bond of ₹25,000 with one surety in the like amount, subject to conditions including availability for interrogation, non-interference with witnesses or the trial, and appearance before the trial court on each date fixed.

Source reference: paras. 7–8

Note: Paragraph 1 identifies Crime No. 277/2026, while paragraph 7 refers to crime “(130/2026)”.

Source reference: paras. 1, 7
06

Acts & Sections Cited

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

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 202311 provisions
Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

SANJU YADAVvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High Court · September 29, 2026

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment