1 2025:CGHC:23916 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4273 of 2025 Sushil Jhajharia @ Sushil Kumar Agrawal S/o Sh. Kanhaiyalal Agrawal Aged About 58 Years R/o Jhajharia Mansion, Ward No. 34, Jagmal Chowk, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, Through (Pairokar) Saransh Agrawal S/o Sushil Kumar Agrawal Aged About 30 Years, R/o Jhajharia Mansion, Ward No. 34, Jagmal Chowk, Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Appellant versus Central Bureau Of Investigation Through S.P., CBI AC-II New Delhi, Camp At Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Dr. Kislay Pandey, Mr. Azad Kokher, Mr. Sumit Jha and Mr. Sumit Rathore, Advocates For Respondent/State : Mr. B. Gopa Kumar (through Video Conferencing) and Mr. Himanshu Pandey, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13/06/ 202 5 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. RC2172025A0010 registered at Police Station-CBI/AC-II/New Delhi, for the offence 2 punishable under Sections 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act as well as Section 61(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, the applicant, on 31.04.2025, informed his son namely Vinap Jhajharia that he would be meeting co- accused Vishal anand (Chief engineer/RSW at SECR, Bilaspur) to ensure likely benefits for his Company in lieu of bribing accused Vishal Anand. Thereafter, he met the co-accused Vishal anand to discuss the alleged resolution of matters and to finalisae the quantum of undue advantage to be provided in this regard. The further allegation against the applicant is that he had instructed his employee namely Manoj Pathak to deliver a sum of Rs. 32 Lakhs at Ranchi, Jharkhand to the relative of co-accused Vishal Anand and a trap was laid by the CBI in which the employee of the applicant was caught red handed alongwith the money. 3. Dr. Kislay Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant submits that apart from merits of the case, he has also filed an application being IA No. 1/2025, seeking grant of ad-interim bail on the ground of serious ailments of the applicant. 4. Dr. Pandey submits that the applicant is in jail since 25.04.2025 and is suffering from various severe ailments such as Type II Diabetese Mellitus with Diabetic Kidney Disease, placing him at imminent risk of diabetic ketoacidosis and multi organ failure. The applicant has been suffering from severe urosepsis with active urinary tract infection with burning micturition and fever, indicating systemic inflammation that can progress to septic shock and without advance medical treatment, his renal function is deteriorating and the applicant requires nephrological care as recommended by the Medical Board. Dr. Pandey has drawn attention of this Court to various documents annexed with the bail application which 3 is in relation to ailment of the applicant and prays that till the regular bail application is finally decided, the applicant may be granted interim bail. 5. On the other hand, Mr. B. Gopa Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent/CBI submits that since the investigation has not been completed and charge sheet has not been filed, the applicant may not be granted the benefit of ad-interim bail as there are chances of tampering with the evidence. Even otherwise, the ailments stated by the learned counsel for the applicant are not so grave so as to cause any threat to life. 6. After hearing the matter at length on the aforesaid IA, when this Court asked the learned counsel for the applicant as to whether he would like to argue the bail application on merits, Dr. Pandey submits that he does not want to press IA No. 1/2025, application for grant of ad-interim bail and further submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the present bail petition also at this stage as the charge sheet has not been filed till date and the applicant may be granted liberty to approach this Court again after filing of the charge sheet by the respondent/CBI. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the other side has no objection. 8. In view of the above, IA No. 1/2025, as prayed by the learned counsel for the applicant, is dismissed as not pressed and the present bail application also stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the applicant to file a fresh bail application, after filing of the charge sheet by the respondent-CBI. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.06.13 19:41:49 +0530