The court ruled on the prerequisites for anticipatory bail based on the absence of specific allegations against the applicant and the subjective nature of the accusations involved.

Digitally signed by Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice ABHISHEK ABHISHEK SHRIVAS SHRIVAS Date:

2025.07.11

18:31:50 Order on Board +0530

11.07.2025

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. 148/2025 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 191, 296, 304, 351(2), 309(6) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. As per the prosecution’s case, the complainant owns a ready-made clothing shop. On 10.03.2025, at approximately 6:30 PM, a local resident informed him that his son had been assaulted during a fight near the old bus stand. The complainant immediately rushed to the scene, where he found his son injured. He then decided to take his son to the nearby police station. However, while en route, it is alleged that the co-accused, Imran Memon, verbally abused and physically attacked both the complainant and his son. Based on these allegations, an FIR was lodged against the applicant and other co-accused for the alleged offences under Sections 115(2), 191, 296, 304, and 351(2), 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that CCTV footage has been obtained from the concerned police station through RTI, which clearly shows that the other co-accused were not present at the place of the incident, and the allegations made by the complainant are completely false and frivolous. He submits that the present FIR No. 148/2025 (dated 10.03.2025) is a retaliatory action (counterblast) to FIR No. 149/2025 filed by the applicant’s relative at Police Station Kotwali, Korba. The prosecution’s case stems from a pre-existing dispute over a loan repayment, which led to a fight between the complainant’s son and the applicant’s relative. The current FIR is an abuse of process aimed at pressuring the applicant’s family. The FIR No. 149/2025 filed by the applicant’s relative contains the true facts of the altercation, which have been suppressed in the present FIR, demonstrating mala fide intent and a deliberate attempt to falsely implicate the applicant. Annexure A/2 is a copy of FIR No.

149/2025. He further submits that the present FIR lacks specific allegations of direct involvement by the applicant in the alleged offences under Sections 115(2), 191, 296, 304, and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The vague and general accusations fail to establish a prima facie case against the applicant. The prosecution’s narrative attributes the alleged assault and abuse solely to co-accused Imran Memon. The applicant has neither been named nor described as a participant in the alleged incident en route to the police station. He also submits that the applicant has no prior criminal record, convictions, or pending cases in any court of law. His antecedents are unblemished, reflecting a law-abiding life and respect for legal institutions. Courts have consistently held that the absence of criminal history is a significant factor favouring the grant of bail, as it negates apprehensions of habitual criminality or threat to society. Detention would disrupt the applicant’s life, causing disproportionate harm compared to the alleged offence. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

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 nature and gravity of the offence, the material on record in the case diary, and the fact that the present