1 2025:CGHC:29044 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 882 of 2025 1 - Agastus Lakara S/o Baldev Lakara Aged About 38 Years Occupation Government Servant/patwari, R/o Royal Park, B-Block 19, Ambikapur, Police Station Gandhinagar, Tahsil Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) (Description Of Applicant Mentioned As Per The Bail Application Moved Before The Learned Trial Court). ... Appellant. versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Gandhinagar, District Sarguja (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Shri Anil Kumar Gulati, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Shri Arvind Dubey, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board 30/06/2025 1. This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the order dated 18.02.2025 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities) Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.), whereby, application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS Act, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant was AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2025.06.30 18:34:01 +0530 2 dismissed. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 09.02.2022, FIR was lodged against Mukesh Munda, Prakash Sahu, Lalita Gharami, Bholu, Subhajeet Mandal, Anil Chatterjee among others with the PS Gandhinagar by Makhan Ram on the ground that he has sold land to Mukesh Munda but no amount was received by him. It is further alleged that the present appellant is a Patwari, who has also helped the other co-accused persons to materialize the aforesaid transactions. The land was sold by Makhan to Mukesh Munda by way of a registered sale deed. Based upon which, the offence has been registered. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant being a Patwari prepared a report of Chauhadde. He further submits that appellant has not made any abetment to suicide to the deceased whose land was sold in favour of one Mukesh Munda vide registered sale deed dated 07.01.2022. He further submits that another case has also been registered about fraudulent transfer of land, in which, present appellant has already been enlarged on bail. He submits that as no offence has been committed on the ground that the deceased belongs to Schedules Castes or Scheduled Tribes category, bar under Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 would not attract for grant of anticipatory bail. He further submits that appellant also belongs to the same category. He also submits that one of the co- accused namely Prakash Sahu has also been granted regular bail vide order dated 29.06.2022 passed in CRA No.905/2022 by this Bench and other co-accused namely Subhajeet Mandal, Dinesh Mandal, Anil 3 Chhatterjee, Mukesh Munda, Reeta Mandal & Lalita Gharami have also been enlarged on regular bail. Considering all such aspects, appellant may be granted anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that present appellant is a Patwari who mutated the government land in the name of private person and against present appellant there is one more case registered under Section 409, 420, 120-B, 467, 468, 471 of IPC, however, it is undisputed that in that case, benefit of anticipatory bail has been extended to the present appellant vide order dated 28.04.2025 passed by coordinate Bench in MCRCA No.589/2025. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegation against the present appellant, further considering that the appellant being a Patwari gave the report and also considering that there is no direct role of the appellant in the act of abetment, so without commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, appeal is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the appellant, 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 Appellant 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 4 Court. (b) The appellant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The appellant 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 appellant and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card along with a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) The appellant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Avinash