1 CGHC010193922026 2026:CGHC:30784 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4679 of 2026 1 - Suraj Bharti S/o Ganpat Bharti Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Arjuni, Ps Akaltara, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. City Kotwali, Balodabazar, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Praveen Das, Additional Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 20.07.2026 1. Heard. 2. This is the First Bail Application of applicant filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail. He is in jail since 30.01.2026 in connection with Crime No. 380/2024 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Balodabazar District : - Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 186, 294, 332, 333, 353, 440, 435, 436, 2 427, 307, 120(B) of IPC and 3 & 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. 3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 10.06.2024, the complainant, Trainee Deputy Superintendent of Police Ms.

Sushanta Lakra, lodged a report stating that on the said date, members of the Satnami community had organized a mass protest rally at Dussehra Maidan, Baloda Bazar, to demand action against the anti-social elements responsible for damaging the Jaitkham at Amar Gufa, Girodpuri Dham, and to press their other demands. Approximately 7,000 to 8,000 persons participated in the rally. Upon receiving prior information regarding the proposed assembly, police personnel and executive magistrates were deployed at the range level to maintain law and order. It was alleged that barricades had been erected at Garden Chowk, Chakrapani School Chowk, and near the Collectorate premises from the standpoint of security to prevent the protesters from entering the Collectorate campus. However, the protesters allegedly turned violent, raised slogans such as "Police and District Administration Hai Hai" and made indecent remarks, including asking the police personnel to wear bangles and dance. Despite repeated requests and persuasion by the police officers and Executive Magistrates, who were following all prescribed safety protocols, the protesters allegedly advanced towards the Collectorate premises, resulting in several police personnel sustaining serious injuries. It was further alleged that while the complainant and the Executive Magistrates were attempting to persuade the protesters to submit their memorandum peacefully, the protesters, upon hearing the announcements over 3

the loudspeaker, allegedly abused the police in filthy language, hurled stones, sticks, and iron rods brought by them, and assaulted the complainant and other police personnel. As a result, police constable Vinod Singh sustained grievous injuries to his left hand and right leg. The report further states that the protesters became more aggressive and that the community leaders, namely co-accused Bhim Krantiveer, Kishore Navrange, along with their associates, including senior members of the Pragatishil Satnami Samaj, namely Sushil Jangde, Mohan Bajare, Dinesh Chaturvedi, and others, acting in a pre-planned manner, used iron rods, sticks, and stones to vandalize the Collectorate and the Office of the Superintendent of Police. It is further alleged that they had also brought matchboxes and, after damaging the four-wheeler and two-wheeler vehicles belonging to the complainant, other employees, and officers stationed within the Collectorate premises with sticks, they siphoned petrol from the vehicles and set them on fire, thereby causing extensive damage and creating an atmosphere of fear and panic within the Collectorate campus. It is further alleged that the protesters set the Collectorate building and the Office of the Superintendent of Police on fire, resulting in panic and a stampede-like situation among the officers and staff present inside the premises.

4. On the basis of the aforesaid report, a First Information Report was registered and the matter was taken up for investigation. During the course of investigation, it was found that the accused persons had committed offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 294, 506, 332, 333, 353, 186, 307, 427, 435, 436, 120-B and 440 of the 4 Indian Penal Code, as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. During the course of investigation, efforts were made to trace the absconding accused. During the search, the suspects/accused, namely the applicant Suraj Bharti, co-accused Amit Baghel and Ajay Yadav, were produced by the Special Police Team (Vishesh Police Team). Upon examination of the memorandum statements of the applicant Suraj Bharti and coaccused Amit Baghel and Ajay Yadav, their call detail records (CDRs), and the statements of the witnesses, evidence was found establishing the presence of accused Suraj Bharti at the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Baloda Bazar, which was one of the places of occurrence. Consequently, applicant Suraj Bharti was arrested on 30.01.2026.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case merely on the allegation of his presence at the place of occurrence. It is contended that he does not belong to any political party, there is no direct or cogent evidence to establish his involvement in the alleged acts of arson, assault, vandalism, or damage to public property. He would further submit that the applicant is in jail since 30.01.2026, the investigation has already been concluded and the charge-sheet has been filed, and therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. Since the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and would submit that the applicant is involved in a 5

grave and serious offence arising out of a pre-planned and organized attack on the Collectorate and the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Baloda Bazar. It is submitted that the unruly mob, of which the applicant was an active participant, indulged in rioting, assaulted police personnel and public servants on duty, vandalized government property, set fire to government offices and official vehicles, and thereby caused extensive loss to public property while creating an atmosphere of fear and panic. Learned counsel would further submit that during the course of investigation, sufficient material has been collected to establish the applicant's active participation in the commission of the offences. Therefore, he would pray for rejection of the bail application. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the diary. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 30.01.2026, charge-sheet has been filed and also considering the fact that conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served in continued detention of the applicant, as such, without further commenting anything on merits of the case, I am of the view that this is a fit case to grant bail to the applicant.

9. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court on the following terms and condition:- (I) Since, the applicant belongs to District Janjgir-Champa, he shall 6 enter the territorial limits of District Baloda Bazar only for the purpose of attending the proceedings before the Trial Court on the notified dates of the Court proceedings and shall leave the district immediately after the proceedings of the day. (ii) 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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the investigating agency. (iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or attempt to influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever. (iv) The applicant shall not indulge in such activities which may disrupt peace and tranquility of the State. (v) In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail in accordance with law. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Digitally signed Judge by KISHORE KISHORE KUMAR KUMAR DESHMUKH DESHMUKH Date:2026.07.21 14:25:31 +0530 Deshmukh

1 CGHC010193922026 2026:CGHC:30784 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4679 of 2026 1 - Suraj Bharti S/o Ganpat Bharti Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Arjuni, Ps Akaltara, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. City Kotwali, Balodabazar, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Praveen Das, Additional Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 20.07.2026 1. Heard. 2. This is the First Bail Application of applicant filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail. He is in jail since 30.01.2026 in connection with Crime No. 380/2024 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Balodabazar District : - Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 186, 294, 332, 333, 353, 440, 435, 436, 2 427, 307, 120(B) of IPC and 3 & 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. 3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 10.06.2024, the complainant, Trainee Deputy Superintendent of Police Ms.

Sushanta Lakra, lodged a report stating that on the said date, members of the Satnami community had organized a mass protest rally at Dussehra Maidan, Baloda Bazar, to demand action against the anti-social elements responsible for damaging the Jaitkham at Amar Gufa, Girodpuri Dham, and to press their other demands. Approximately 7,000 to 8,000 persons participated in the rally. Upon receiving prior information regarding the proposed assembly, police personnel and executive magistrates were deployed at the range level to maintain law and order. It was alleged that barricades had been erected at Garden Chowk, Chakrapani School Chowk, and near the Collectorate premises from the standpoint of security to prevent the protesters from entering the Collectorate campus. However, the protesters allegedly turned violent, raised slogans such as "Police and District Administration Hai Hai" and made indecent remarks, including asking the police personnel to wear bangles and dance. Despite repeated requests and persuasion by the police officers and Executive Magistrates, who were following all prescribed safety protocols, the protesters allegedly advanced towards the Collectorate premises, resulting in several police personnel sustaining serious injuries. It was further alleged that while the complainant and the Executive Magistrates were attempting to persuade the protesters to submit their memorandum peacefully, the protesters, upon hearing the announcements over 3

the loudspeaker, allegedly abused the police in filthy language, hurled stones, sticks, and iron rods brought by them, and assaulted the complainant and other police personnel. As a result, police constable Vinod Singh sustained grievous injuries to his left hand and right leg. The report further states that the protesters became more aggressive and that the community leaders, namely co-accused Bhim Krantiveer, Kishore Navrange, along with their associates, including senior members of the Pragatishil Satnami Samaj, namely Sushil Jangde, Mohan Bajare, Dinesh Chaturvedi, and others, acting in a pre-planned manner, used iron rods, sticks, and stones to vandalize the Collectorate and the Office of the Superintendent of Police. It is further alleged that they had also brought matchboxes and, after damaging the four-wheeler and two-wheeler vehicles belonging to the complainant, other employees, and officers stationed within the Collectorate premises with sticks, they siphoned petrol from the vehicles and set them on fire, thereby causing extensive damage and creating an atmosphere of fear and panic within the Collectorate campus. It is further alleged that the protesters set the Collectorate building and the Office of the Superintendent of Police on fire, resulting in panic and a stampede-like situation among the officers and staff present inside the premises.

4. On the basis of the aforesaid report, a First Information Report was registered and the matter was taken up for investigation. During the course of investigation, it was found that the accused persons had committed offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 294, 506, 332, 333, 353, 186, 307, 427, 435, 436, 120-B and 440 of the 4 Indian Penal Code, as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. During the course of investigation, efforts were made to trace the absconding accused. During the search, the suspects/accused, namely the applicant Suraj Bharti, co-accused Amit Baghel and Ajay Yadav, were produced by the Special Police Team (Vishesh Police Team). Upon examination of the memorandum statements of the applicant Suraj Bharti and coaccused Amit Baghel and Ajay Yadav, their call detail records (CDRs), and the statements of the witnesses, evidence was found establishing the presence of accused Suraj Bharti at the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Baloda Bazar, which was one of the places of occurrence. Consequently, applicant Suraj Bharti was arrested on 30.01.2026.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case merely on the allegation of his presence at the place of occurrence. It is contended that he does not belong to any political party, there is no direct or cogent evidence to establish his involvement in the alleged acts of arson, assault, vandalism, or damage to public property. He would further submit that the applicant is in jail since 30.01.2026, the investigation has already been concluded and the charge-sheet has been filed, and therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. Since the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and would submit that the applicant is involved in a 5

grave and serious offence arising out of a pre-planned and organized attack on the Collectorate and the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Baloda Bazar. It is submitted that the unruly mob, of which the applicant was an active participant, indulged in rioting, assaulted police personnel and public servants on duty, vandalized government property, set fire to government offices and official vehicles, and thereby caused extensive loss to public property while creating an atmosphere of fear and panic. Learned counsel would further submit that during the course of investigation, sufficient material has been collected to establish the applicant's active participation in the commission of the offences. Therefore, he would pray for rejection of the bail application. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the diary. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 30.01.2026, charge-sheet has been filed and also considering the fact that conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served in continued detention of the applicant, as such, without further commenting anything on merits of the case, I am of the view that this is a fit case to grant bail to the applicant.

9. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court on the following terms and condition:- (I) Since, the applicant belongs to District Janjgir-Champa, he shall 6 enter the territorial limits of District Baloda Bazar only for the purpose of attending the proceedings before the Trial Court on the notified dates of the Court proceedings and shall leave the district immediately after the proceedings of the day. (ii) 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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the investigating agency. (iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or attempt to influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever. (iv) The applicant shall not indulge in such activities which may disrupt peace and tranquility of the State. (v) In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail in accordance with law. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Digitally signed Judge by KISHORE KISHORE KUMAR KUMAR DESHMUKH DESHMUKH Date:2026.07.21 14:25:31 +0530 Deshmukh