1 2026:CGHC:26623 NAFR VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.01 11:05:39 +0530 MCRCA No. 975 of 2026 Sunil Yadav S/o Baijnath Yadav Aged About 47 Years R/o Hospital Ward, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Farasgaon Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rajbahadur Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 30.06.2026 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.62/2026 registered at Police Station – Farasgaon Kondagaon, District Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 308(2), 319(2) & 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 25.03.2026, the applicant, who claims to be a journalist, along with his associate 2

intercepted an Eicher Mini Truck carrying timber near an under-construction petrol pump at Borgaon Dhaba within the jurisdiction of Police Station Farasgaon. It is alleged that the applicant questioned the driver regarding the timber being transported and demanded a sum of Rs.50,000/- for allowing the vehicle to proceed and, upon the driver's refusal, forcibly took an amount of Rs.1,350/- from his possession. Thereafter, the applicant allegedly contacted certain persons over telephone, and subsequently the truck was allowed to proceed. Later, the vehicle was intercepted by the Forest Department at the Manchadur Forest Check Post and appropriate action was taken with respect to the timber being transported. On 28.03.2026, the driver submitted a written complaint before Police Station Farasgaon alleging commission of the aforesaid acts by the applicant. After conducting a preliminary enquiry and recording the statements of the complainant and other witnesses, the police registered an FIR on 30.05.2026 against the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 308(2), 319(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. During the course of investigation, the investigating agency collected statements and other material which, according to the prosecution, prima facie disclose the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offences, and the investigation is presently in progress.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the allegations levelled against him are false, concocted and do not disclose the commission of any offence punishable under Sections 308(2), 319(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Learned counsel submits that the applicant, being a journalist, was present at 3

the spot solely in the discharge of his professional duties for the purpose of verifying information regarding the alleged illegal transportation of timber and had no connection whatsoever with the transportation of the timber or with the persons allegedly involved therein. On the contrary, the applicant had informed the concerned Forest authorities regarding the suspected illegal transportation of timber and had also apprised the Range Forest Officer about the developments, which clearly demonstrates his bona fides. It is further submitted that there is an unexplained and inordinate delay of more than two months in registration of the FIR, which casts serious doubt on the genuineness of the prosecution case. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has consistently raised issues of public importance, including allegations of irregularities and illegal recruitments in Government establishments, and had submitted several complaints to the competent authorities regarding administrative irregularities. The present prosecution, therefore, appears to be a retaliatory measure actuated by mala fide intention to harass and intimidate the applicant on account of his professional activities as a journalist. It is further argued that the allegations are inherently improbable and appear to be an afterthought. The applicant has fully cooperated with the enquiry and investigation, has appeared before the authorities pursuant to notice, and has furnished his statement. It is submitted that custodial interrogation of the applicant is neither necessary nor warranted as the case is based on documentary evidence and statements already available with the investigating agency, and no recovery is required to be effected from him. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is a reputed journalist and 4

businessman having deep roots in society and is a permanent resident of District Kondagaon. There is no likelihood of his absconding, tampering with the prosecution evidence or influencing the witnesses. He undertakes to cooperate with the investigation, to remain available for interrogation whenever required, and to abide by all conditions that may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court. It is, therefore, prayed that, in order to protect the applicant's personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, he be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the dispute, and the material available in the case diary, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Sunil Yadav, on executing a personal bond and one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

(a) he 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. 5 (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he 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 his 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) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav

1 2026:CGHC:26623 NAFR VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.01 11:05:39 +0530 MCRCA No. 975 of 2026 Sunil Yadav S/o Baijnath Yadav Aged About 47 Years R/o Hospital Ward, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Farasgaon Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rajbahadur Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 30.06.2026 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.62/2026 registered at Police Station – Farasgaon Kondagaon, District Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 308(2), 319(2) & 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 25.03.2026, the applicant, who claims to be a journalist, along with his associate 2

intercepted an Eicher Mini Truck carrying timber near an under-construction petrol pump at Borgaon Dhaba within the jurisdiction of Police Station Farasgaon. It is alleged that the applicant questioned the driver regarding the timber being transported and demanded a sum of Rs.50,000/- for allowing the vehicle to proceed and, upon the driver's refusal, forcibly took an amount of Rs.1,350/- from his possession. Thereafter, the applicant allegedly contacted certain persons over telephone, and subsequently the truck was allowed to proceed. Later, the vehicle was intercepted by the Forest Department at the Manchadur Forest Check Post and appropriate action was taken with respect to the timber being transported. On 28.03.2026, the driver submitted a written complaint before Police Station Farasgaon alleging commission of the aforesaid acts by the applicant. After conducting a preliminary enquiry and recording the statements of the complainant and other witnesses, the police registered an FIR on 30.05.2026 against the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 308(2), 319(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. During the course of investigation, the investigating agency collected statements and other material which, according to the prosecution, prima facie disclose the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offences, and the investigation is presently in progress.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the allegations levelled against him are false, concocted and do not disclose the commission of any offence punishable under Sections 308(2), 319(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Learned counsel submits that the applicant, being a journalist, was present at 3

the spot solely in the discharge of his professional duties for the purpose of verifying information regarding the alleged illegal transportation of timber and had no connection whatsoever with the transportation of the timber or with the persons allegedly involved therein. On the contrary, the applicant had informed the concerned Forest authorities regarding the suspected illegal transportation of timber and had also apprised the Range Forest Officer about the developments, which clearly demonstrates his bona fides. It is further submitted that there is an unexplained and inordinate delay of more than two months in registration of the FIR, which casts serious doubt on the genuineness of the prosecution case. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has consistently raised issues of public importance, including allegations of irregularities and illegal recruitments in Government establishments, and had submitted several complaints to the competent authorities regarding administrative irregularities. The present prosecution, therefore, appears to be a retaliatory measure actuated by mala fide intention to harass and intimidate the applicant on account of his professional activities as a journalist. It is further argued that the allegations are inherently improbable and appear to be an afterthought. The applicant has fully cooperated with the enquiry and investigation, has appeared before the authorities pursuant to notice, and has furnished his statement. It is submitted that custodial interrogation of the applicant is neither necessary nor warranted as the case is based on documentary evidence and statements already available with the investigating agency, and no recovery is required to be effected from him. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is a reputed journalist and 4

businessman having deep roots in society and is a permanent resident of District Kondagaon. There is no likelihood of his absconding, tampering with the prosecution evidence or influencing the witnesses. He undertakes to cooperate with the investigation, to remain available for interrogation whenever required, and to abide by all conditions that may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court. It is, therefore, prayed that, in order to protect the applicant's personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, he be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the dispute, and the material available in the case diary, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Sunil Yadav, on executing a personal bond and one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

(a) he 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. 5 (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he 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 his 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) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav