[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Ankit Vashisth vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 17 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
VAISHALI
LUCKY 2026:CGHC:12695
NAGARIA
Digitally signed by
NAFR
VAISHALI LUCKY
NAGARIA
Date: 2026.03.18
17:15:44 +0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 404 of 2026
• Ankit Vashisth S/o Rameshchandra Vashisth Aged About 25 Years
R/o Village Baisagapara, Baikunthpur, P.S. Baikunthpur, Distt.
Koriya, Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant(s)
versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through Sho, P.S. Baikunthpur, Distt. Koriya,
Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
(Cause title is taken from Case Information System)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
17/03/2026
1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the
applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime
No.64/2026 registered at Police Station - Baikunthpur, District:
Koriya, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2) of
Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Sections 4 & 5 of Chhattisgarh Tohahi
Pratadna Niwaran Adhiniyam, 2005.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the house of complainant
and applicant are adjacent to each other and on 16.02.2026 at 10
A.M complainant through labour was going for construction work of
her house at that time applicant restrained the labour from work and
when complainant object that, then applicant utter filthy language
and abused her by asking played witchcraft act in death of his
mother and also attempted to assault her by bricks. Therefore,
offence has been registered at Police Station Baikunthpur, under
section- 296, 351 (2) of B.N.S & 4, 5 of C.G Tonahi Pratadna Niwaran
Adhiniyam, 2005 and investigation is ongoing.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted applicant is innocent
and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further
contended that on the date of incident the husband of complainant
and complainant were going to construction over the boundary of
their house, which is adjacent to the house of applicant and for that
applicant has already made complaint before the authority of illegal
construction and further S.D.M (Revenue) Baikunthpur has
restrained the complainant from construction work by order dated
15.12.2025 and on that day applicant only ask them to comply with
the order passed by the authority. Copy of the order dated
15.12.2025 passed by S.D.M (Revenue) Baikunthpur is annexed
herewith as Annexure A/3. He also submits that due to the restrain
order passed by the authority complainant has grudge upon
applicant, so to make pressure upon applicant present false case has
been registered against the applicant with false accusation. Moreover,
complainant deliberately lodged the report for the offence under
section 4 & 5 of Tonahi Pratadna Niwaran Adhiniyam as it is non
bailable in nature and other offence under section 296, 351 (2) of
B.N.S are bailable in nature, therefore, he submits that the present
applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the non -
applicant/State, opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
the applicant.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
materials available on record.
6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the
applicant and perusing the case diary as well as the material
available on record, this Court finds that the dispute between the
parties appears to be primarily of a civil nature arising out of
construction over the boundary wall. It is also not disputed that prior
to the alleged incident, an order dated 15.12.2025 was passed by the
S.D.M. (Revenue), Baikunthpur restraining the complainant from
carrying out construction work, and the applicant had raised
objections before the competent authority. Taking into consideration
the aforesaid background, the possibility of false implication of the
applicant due to prior enmity cannot be ruled out at this stage.
Further, except for the offences under Sections 4 and 5 of the Tonahi
Pratadna Niwaran Adhiniyam, the other alleged offences are bailable
in nature. There is no material on record to indicate that the
applicant is likely to abscond or tamper with the prosecution
evidence, therefore, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in
the event of arrest of the applicant - Ankit Vashist, on executing a
personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of
the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following
conditions:-
(a) 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 from disclosing such fact to the
Court.
(b) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be
prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.
(c) 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.
(d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of
their adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size
photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall
be verified by the trial Court.
(e) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of
similar nature in future.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Vaishali
