1 2025:CGHC:50491 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1550 of 2025 Ramashankar Chandrakar S/o Maniklal Chandrakar, Aged About 35 Years Occupation- Salesman, Incharge Society Manager, Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Kodwa Godan, R/o- Village Nanapuri, Police Station Kunda, Tahsil Pandariya, District Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kukdur, District - Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 09.10.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 100/2025, registered at Police Station – Kukdur, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.10.10 14:18:42 +0530 2 under Sections 316(5) and 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution's case, the applicant was working as the In- charge of the Paddy Procurement Center at Kodwa, Godan, and failed to produce a stock of 8,599.32 quintals of paddy during an inspection conducted by the authorities. He also failed to produce documents related to the transportation of four truckloads of paddy. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that against the applicant neither allegation about cheating or embezzlement of the stock of the paddy, allegation is that about shortage of stock and non-providing the document in respect of the transporting the paddy to the collection centre Selud, which not constitute alleged offences. He also submits that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedents which has been decided on 29.04.2017 by the trial Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and from perusal of the case diary reveals that on 11/09/2025, the complainant, Alok Kumar Mishra, Branch Manager of the District Cooperative and Central Bank Ltd., Kukdur Branch, District Kabirdham, submitted an application stating that, as per the order of the Office of the Collector, Food Department, District Kabirdham, he was assigned the responsibility of inspecting the 3 paddy procurement at the Paddy Procurement Center, Kodva Godan for the year 2024–25. During the inspection, on reviewing the purchase records and daily reports of the procurement center, it was found that a stock of 8,599.32 quintals of paddy should have been available at the center. However, only 6,363 bags of paddy weighing 2,557 quintals (assuming 40 kg per bag) were found during physical verification. Thus, as of 29/04/2025, there was a discrepancy of 6,042.12 quintals of paddy. When questioned by the inspection team, the accused stated that, by mistake, thin paddy was sent in place of coarse paddy in four truck consignments consisting of 891 bags, 811 bags, 496 bags, and 883 bags, respectively. However, the said four truckloads of paddy were neither received by the Selud storage in-charge, nor were they returned, and no valid documents related to the same were presented by the accused. In this manner, the accused is alleged to have caused a loss of Rs.1,38,96,876/- to the government. Therefore, the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the allegations levelled against the applicant, and upon perusal of the available records, it transpires that on 11/09/2025, Alok Kumar Mishra, Branch Manager of the District Cooperative and Central Bank Ltd., Kukdur Branch, Kabirdham, submitted a complaint stating that, as per the Collector's order, he was assigned to inspect the paddy 4 procurement at Kodva Godan Procurement Center for the year 2024–25, during inspection, records showed that 8,599.32 quintals of paddy should have been in stock, but only 2,557 quintals (6,363 bags) were physically found, revealing a shortfall of 6,042.12 quintals as of 29/04/2025, when questioned, the accused claimed that four truckloads of thin paddy were mistakenly sent instead of coarse paddy, with 891, 811, 496, and 883 bags respectively, however, these trucks were neither received by the Selud storage in- charge nor returned, and no supporting documents were provided, further considering the fact that he accused is alleged to have caused a financial loss of Rs.1,38,96,876/- to the government, in view of the above, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail application of the applicant – Ramashankar Chandrakar, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with Crime No. 100/2025, registered at Police Station – Kukdur, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 316(5) and 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti