##PAGE1##

1

2026:CGHC:23039

VAISHALI

LUCKY

NAFR

NAGARIA

Digitally signed by

VAISHALI LUCKY

NAGARIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

Date: 2026.05.15

18:20:08 +0530

MCRCA No. 749 of 2026

• Praveen Kumar Agrawal S/o. Hanuman Prasad Agrawal Aged About

53 Years Occupation Business, R/o. Kudla Vasundhara City,

(Agrasen Ward) P.S.- Ambikapur (Wrongly Mention As Sadar) Tehsil-

Ambikapur District- Surguja (C.G)

... Applicant(s)

versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station

Ambikapur (Wrongly Mention As Sadar) District- Surguja (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

(Cause title is taken from Case Information System)

For Applicant(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar Paranjpe, Senior Advocate

with Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

Order on Board

14/05/2026

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.259/2026 registered at Police Station – Ambikapur, District:

Sarguja, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 125, 270,

287, 324(6), 326(g) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and 9(b)(i)(b) of

the Explosive Act, 1884.

2

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant namely

Pratul Pandey submitted a written complaint on 26/04/2026 alleging

that the applicant runs a shop behind the house of the complainant

which is owned by co-accused Mukesh Agarwal and runs by the

applicant which consists of plastics materials. On 23/04/2026 while

welding work was underway on the shop's roof, a spark ignited the

fire, causing the shop and warehouse to catch fire, due to the fire the

firecrackers ignited, and the flames entered the complainant's home,

burning his AC, TV, bed, sofa, and other household items.

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 initially, on 26.04.2026, offences under Sections 336,

268 and 285 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to

Sections 336, 268 and 285 of the IPC), which are bailable in nature,

were registered against the applicant. However, on the very next day,

i.e.,27.04.2026, the Inspector General of Police, Sarguja Range,

allegedly acting under the influence of the complainant and without

conducting any proper inquiry, issued a show-cause notice to the

concerned Investigating Officer and directed registration of offences

under Sections 324(6) and 326(g) of the BNS, 2023, along with

Section 9(b)(i)(b) of the Explosives Act, 1884, which are non-bailable

offences, though the ingredients of the said offences are not attracted

in the present case. A copy of the letter dated 27.04.2026 has been

annexed as Annexure A-3. It is further submitted that the applicant’s

shop is duly registered with the GST Department under the name

and style of “Praveen Agency,” and therefore the allegation that the

applicant was carrying on any unlawful activity is wholly baseless. A

copy of the GST Registration Certificate along with relevant

3

documents has been filed as Annexure A-4. He further submits that

the applicant does not run any firecracker shop nor does he store any

inflammable or explosive substances. The applicant is engaged in the

business of wholesale plastic materials and possesses a valid Udyam

Registration Certificate issued under the Micro, Small and Medium

Enterprises scheme by the Government of India. A copy of the said

certificate is annexed as Annexure A-5. It is also submitted that the

premises in question were being used by the applicant with the

consent of Smt. Shalini Agrawal, wife of Mukesh Kumar Agrawal, who

had permitted the applicant to run the wholesale business therein

through a registered consent letter. A copy of the registered consent

letter has been annexed as Annexure A-6. Learned counsel argues

that the contents of the FIR themselves indicate that the incident was

merely an accid