1 2025:CGHC:48803 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1481 of 2025 • Surendra Kumar Nanda S/o Shri Nripa Nanda Aged About 62 Years R/o Old Christian Street, Ward No. 30, Bijipur, Bramhapur, Sadar Ganjam, District Ganjam, Odisha (Incorrectly Referred As Surendra Nanda In The Bail Rejection Order Dated 09-09-2025) ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Civil Line, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Amrito Das, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Swajeet Singh Ubweja, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 23.09.2025 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. 281/2025 registered at Police Station – Civil Line, Raipur, District : Raipur, (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 34, 420, 467, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code,1860. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, in brief is that the complainants lodged an FIR against the applicant along with the office-bearers who have supposedly impersonated themselves as the members of the VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.09.24 16:56:31 +0530 2 Governing Body of the Chhattisgarh Diocese Board of Education. The FIR narrates that two accused persons fraudulently impersonating themselves as the office bearers of the said society, have fraudulently taken decision while deceitfully holding the post of Vice- Chairman and Sectary. According to the complainants the said two accused persons were never given the charge of the governing body as they claim and the decision taken by them as governing members is illegal. The complainant to its furtherance claims the governing members were "fraudulently" holding the said post when they registered an FIR against the complainants in the year 2024. The complaint further goes on to narrate that the while the two accused where "fraudulently" holding the said posts they have wrongfully used the official letter head of the society and have passed numerous orders which as per the complainant the office bearers were not empowered to do and thereby an FIR was registered was against the applicant under Sections 34, 420, 467,468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code “in short IPC”, 1860 on 19.06.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that the FIR does not disclose any specific allegation or active role of the applicant, and even on a plain reading of its contents, no offence is made out against him. It is contended that while the complainants have narrated allegations of impersonation by certain office bearers of the Governing Body of the Chhattisgarh Diocese Board of Education, there is no material showing the applicant’s involvement. On the contrary, the complainants themselves were previously accused of financial irregularities in the society, which was the subject matter of W.P.(PIL) No. 71/2016, 3 wherein this Hon’ble Court directed an inquiry against them vide order dated 18.11.2022. It is further submitted that due to widespread mismanagement and misuse of office, the Synod of The Church of North India, New Delhi, dissolved the Governing Body in February 2023 and constituted an ad-hoc committee, which later included two of the complainants as members. He submits that the present FIR has been lodged only to harass and malign the applicant, who, being the Bishop and Chairman of the society managing schools, was earlier falsely implicated in four FIRs registered on the same day, 27.05.2024, in District Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has already granted him bail vide order dated 20.08.2024. Apart from these cases, there are no other criminal antecedents against the applicant. It is further pointed out that three co-accused in the same FIR have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Hon’ble Court vide orders dated 25.07.2025, 06.08.2025 and 18.09.2025 in MCRCA Nos. 1102/2025, 1193/2025 and MCRCA No.1441 of 2025 respectively. Therefore, he submits that the present applicant is also entitled to be released on anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the non - applicant/State, opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious, involving fraud, forgery, and impersonation by falsely claiming to be office-bearers of the Governing Body of the Chhattisgarh Diocese Board of Education. It is contended that the accused not only misused the official letterhead of the society to pass unauthorized orders but also registered a false FIR against the 4 complainants in 2024 while deceitfully holding these posts. Therefore, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, and the material placed on record, it is apparent that no specific overt act has been attributed to the present applicant in the FIR. The allegations primarily relate to certain office bearers who are alleged to have impersonated themselves as members of the Governing Body, and there is no direct evidence showing the applicant’s involvement. It is also noted that three co-accused in the same FIR have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 25.07.2025, 06.08.2025 and 18.09.2025 in MCRCA Nos. 1102/2025, 1193/2025 and MCRCA No.1441 of 2025 respectively. Furthermore, though four FIRs were earlier registered against the applicant on 27.05.2024 in District Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, for alleged financial irregularities, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has already granted bail to the applicant in those matters vide order dated 20.08.2024, and apart from these cases, there are no other criminal antecedents against him. Hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant –Surendra Kumar Nanda, 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 applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted 5 with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicant 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 applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali