Chhattisgarh High Court
MCRCA/1577/2026 of MUKESH YADAV Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 8 October 2026
2026:CGHC:43882 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1577 of 2026 1. Mukesh Yadav S/o Dhrubali Yadav Aged About 30 Years R/o Village - Bardand Kandraja, Police Station - Kamleshpur, Tahsil - Mainpat, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1. State of
CGHC010371522026
2026:CGHC:43882
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 1577 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Mukesh Yadav S/o Dhrubali Yadav Aged About 30 Years R/o Village - Bardand Kandraja, Police Station - Kamleshpur, Tahsil - Mainpat, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh
... Applicant versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Kotwali, Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh
... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shailesh Puriya, Advocate For Non-applicant : Ms. Evelin Juneja, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 09/10/2026
1. This is first bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.587/2026 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Ambikapur District Surguja (CG) under Sections 74, 140 (3), 351(3), 115 (2) and 3 (5) of BNS.
2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged written report in concerned police station alleging that on SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Digitally signed by SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI
22.8.2026 at about 9:00 p.m. when she was returning her house from her workplace on her scooty, the applicant stopped her on the way, snatched her mobile, handed over her scooty to co-accused, forcibly dragged her inside white colour car and took her towards Mainpat road. Co-accused was following them on her scooty. Around 10-11 p.m. in the night, applicant parked the car near a petrol pump and thereafter misbehaved with her. She tried to raise voice, applicant firstly assaulted her and thereafter tied her hands. When her parents reached the spot, applicant and co- accused fled away. Based on aforementioned allegations, instant crime is registered against the applicant.
3. Learned counsel for applicant would submit that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in crime in question only because the complainant, a married woman facing divorce proceeding instituted by her husband, is interested to live along with applicant and in order to mount pressure upon him false report has been lodged. Applicant is ready to co- operate with the Police in investigation and also to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court while granting anticipatory bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes submissions of learned counsel for applicant and submits that incident took place in the night of 22.8.2026 and FIR was lodged on next day. Corresponding injuries on the person of complainant was noticed in medical examination.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
6. Taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel for respective parties, nature of allegations and the manner in which offence is alleged to have been committed, I am not inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, anticipatory bail application of applicant is rejected.
Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge