01Facts
The applicant sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 195/2026, registered at Police Station Chal, Raigarh, for alleged offences under Sections 115(2), 119(1), 126(2), 296, 3(5) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
¶ 1The prosecution alleged that, on 6 August 2026, the complainant was abused, threatened and assaulted, including being stabbed in the stomach; it also alleged that a co-accused took ₹2,200 and deflated a truck tyre.
¶ 2The applicant claimed false implication, relied on the complainant’s no-objection to bail and on anticipatory bail granted to co-accused persons. The trial court had rejected his application, taking account of one criminal antecedent.
¶ 3, 602Issues
i.Whether the applicant should be granted anticipatory bail in connection with the alleged offences
¶ 1, 6ii.Whether the applicant’s criminal antecedent outweighed the co-accused’s bail orders and the complainant’s no-objection in determining his entitlement to anticipatory bail?
¶ 3–603Law Applied
The application was considered under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which provides for directions for grant of bail to a person apprehending arrest.
¶ 1The Court also noted the alleged offences under Sections 115(2), 119(1), 126(2), 296, 3(5) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
¶ 1No precedent or further legal test was cited in the order; the Court assessed the application on the facts and circumstances, including the nature of the allegations, the applicant’s antecedent, parity with co-accused, and the complainant’s no-objection.
¶ 6Provisions in the judgment · 7 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 115Section 119Section 126Section 296Section 3Section 351
04Reasoning
The Court considered the nature of the allegations and noted that the trial court had rejected bail on the basis of one criminal antecedent.
¶ 6It weighed that circumstance against the fact that co-accused persons had been granted bail and that the complainant had expressed no objection before the lower court. On that overall assessment, and without expressing any view on the merits, the Court found it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail.
¶ 605Holding
The Court allowed the application and directed that, in the event of arrest in the stated crime, the applicant be released on anticipatory bail upon executing a personal bond of ₹25,000 with one surety in the like amount.
¶ 7The applicant must make himself available for interrogation when required, refrain from influencing persons acquainted with the case or otherwise prejudicing a fair trial, and appear before the trial court on every date fixed until the trial is disposed of.
¶ 7Original Court PDF
DURGA PRASAD DANSENAvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
