-1- 2025:CGHC:40777 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1192 of 2025 Ujjwal Das S/o Shivlal Das Aged About 37 Years Present Address- Branch Manager Canara Bank, Devdhar, Post- Devdhar, Police Station- Devdhar, Tehsil And District- Devdhar (Jharkhand ) ... Applicant (s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Station Komakhan District- Mahasamund ( C.G. ). ...Respondent(s) For Applicant : Ms. Sejal Makkad, Advocate with Mr. Pranay Thite and Prateek Dhangar, Advocates For State : Mr. Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 13/08/2025 1. Applicant has filed this application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of anticipatory bail as he was apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.105 of 2021 registered at Police Station- Komakhan, District- Mahasamund (CG) for offence Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2025.08.14 18:30:08 +0530 -2- punishable under Sections 120-B, 34, 406, 409, 419, 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 477-A of IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Anandram Chouhan lodged report to the concerned police station on 03.07.2021 alleging that he was registered owner of land bearing kh. no. 232 admeasuring 4.17 hectares. In the year 2012-13 he intended to sell the said land and in that process he came in contact with one Kashiram Baghel (co-accused) who assured him that he will search buyer of land but for it complainant is required to handover original rin-pustika (kissan book) upon which complainant handed over the same to co- accused. After lapse of 3- 4 years, when no buyer contacted him, he asked for return of rin-pustika from Kashiram upon which he was informed that it was lost, however, he will get prepared duplicate rin-pustika, expenses of which is to be borne by complainant. But after long time when duplicate rin-pustika was not handed over to complainant, he himself made an attempt and as per advice he lodged complaint to concerned police station of missing of rin-pustika. Police recorded proceeding under Section 155 of Cr.P.C. and handed over copy to him based upon which he made an application before Tahsildar for issuing duplicate rin-pustika. At that relevant point of time he came to know that on his rin-pustika there was charge of two loans one form Canara Bank and another from Dena Bank, Bagbahara Branch of Rs.5 lakh and Rs.4 lakh -3- respectively. It is thereafter the FIR was lodged in the concerned police station on 03.07.2021 against applicant, the then Branch Manager of Canara Bank Branch Mahasamund, Prashant Patel the then Branch Manager, Dena Bank, Branch Mahasamund, Kashiram Baghel and Kritpal Gada. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime. From contents of FIR, it is reflecting that main culprit who hatched conspiracy of committing the offence is Kashiram Baghel and Kritpal Gada. Kashiram has obtained rin-pustika of complainant and he was impersonated by Kritpal Gada in the document of procuring loan from Bank and accordingly loan was sanctioned. She also submits that applicant being Bank Manager is not to prepare all the documents of loan but it comes to his table only for sanction. Applicant has not knowingly signed the sanction letter sanctioning KCC loan of Rs.5 lakh of any cheating or fraud committed by other co-accused for getting loan. She also contended that there is no other criminal record of applicant, he being the sincere and hardworking employee of Bank has been granted promotion from Manager to Senior Manager looking to his conduct and work, in discharge of his duties. Applicant is not absconding, however, he was posted at Delhi, Chandigarh and now at Deoghar, Jharkhand . She submits that applicant is holding the post of Senior Manager, there is no likelihood of his absconding and further he would appear and co-operate in the -4- investigation and will appear before investigating agency as and when required and therefore he be extended benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submission of learned counsel for the applicant. He submits that from proceedings of case diary and documents available, it is reflecting that initially rin-pustika was handed over to co-accused Kashiram who assured the complainant that he will make arrangement for buyer of the immovable property situated at Village Boirgaonkhar bearing kh. no.232 admeasuring 4.17 hectares and has also procured original rin-pustika from complainant. He contended that in rin -pustika which was placed in Canara Bank, Bagbahra Branch, photograph of complainant is affixed and in the sanction letter photograph of co-accused Kritpal Gada is affixed. At the time of sanction of loan in the bank record, two different photographs in the name of Anandram are affixed, however, applicant even then has sanctioned the loan which shows his involvement in commission of crime. However, he do not dispute the submission of learned counsel for applicant that the applicant is not shown to be absconding and further that documents submitted before Dena Bank for sanction of KCC loan, photograph of co-accused Kritpal Gada is affixed in rin-pustika as also in the sanction letter. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. -5- 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, applicant being the employee of Canara Bank and is holding post of Senior Manager posted at Deoghar, Jharkhand, he has not been shown to be absconding, he was not arrested since 03.07.2021 and is continuously working at place of his posting, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to allow the application. 7. Accordingly, application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail by the Officer arresting him on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting officer. Applicant shall also abide by the following conditions :- “(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when required; (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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; Certified copy as per rules. Sd/---/--/---/-/---/-/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen