MCRCA/1701/2026 of KULDEEP SINGH Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 12 October 2026

1. Applicant has preferred First bail application under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail as he apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 0649/2026 registered at Police Station- Kotwali, District Korba RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI

(C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 463, 464, 467, 470, 471 and 120-B of IPC.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Chetna Singh who is daughter of co-accused Smt. Tikatin Bai alias Pushpa and sister of the present applicant had filed a complaint case before the Jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175 (3) of BNSS. The Jurisdictional Magistrate after enquiring into the compliant has directed to concerned police station to register the crime, accordingly, aforementioned case is registered. Applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with the aforementioned crime number.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent, not involved in alleged commission of offences and he has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He also submits that present applicant is son of co-accused Smt. Tikatin Bai alias Pushpa, who has been enlarged on anticipatory bail in MCRCA No.1486/2026 and case of the present applicant is also on similar footing. There is no other criminal antecedent registered against the applicant, hence, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant, however he do not dispute submission of counsel for the applicant that the allegation against the present applicant is identical to that of co-accused Smt. Tikatin Bai alias Pushpa who has been enlarged on anticipatory bail.

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 present applicant is son of co-accused Smt. Tikatin Bai alias Pushpa, who has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail in MCRCA No.1486/2026 and there is no other criminal antecedent registered against the applicant, 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 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