MCRCA/1609/2026 of PURUSHOTTAM PUROHIT Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 6 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. RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI

262/2026 registered at Police Station- Sitapur, District Surguja (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 108 and 3(5) of BNS.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 25.12.2025, at about 08:00 p.m., a phone call from Bharat Yadav was received on the mobile phone of the deceased, during which the applicant also allegedly threatened the deceased. On the following day, i.e., 26.12.2025, at about 05:00 p.m., the family members found Dinesh Gupta hanging, and he had died. The incident was reported to the police, pursuant to which a crime was registered against five persons, including the applicant. Hence, the present application for anticipatory bail.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been been falsely implicated in the crime. The allegation against the applicant is that the applicant being the media reporter, was threatening the deceased that he will flash the news of irregularities committed by him in the Cooperative Society. He also contended that according to report it is appearing that co-accused Bhupendra Singh Parihar who had taken Rs. 52,00,000/- and not returning the same, which is cause of deceased committing suicide. He also submits that there is no any other criminal antecedent against the applicant, therefore the benefit of anticipatory bail may be extended to him.

4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and submits that according to allegation the applicant used to struck of publishing the news in social media of the alleged irregularities in Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, Branch Petla. He also contended that based on the report, crime is registered. There is prima facie allegation against the applicant. Upon asking he submits that there is no other criminal antecedent registered against the applicant.

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, 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