1 2025:CGHC:56765 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1840 of 2025 Suresh S/o Ramlal Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Mayana, Tehsil Charama, Police Station Charama, District- Uttar Bastar Kanker, C.G. --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer- Police Station Charama, District- Uttar Bastar Kanker, C.G. --- Respondent(s) MCRCA No. 1839 of 2025 Ishwari Poya D/o Subhash Poya Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Mayana, Tehsil Charama, Police Station Charama, District- Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Charama, District- Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Syed Mohammad Sohail Afzal, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21.11.2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) has been filed by the applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.123/2025 registered at Police Station Charama, District- Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 34 of IPC, Sections 340 and 318(4) of BNS. 2. Prosecution case in brief is that the applicants, along with other associates, fraudulently prepared forged Forest Rights pattas and cheated the Government, causing a financial loss of Rs.5,17,773/-. It is further shown in the case diary that the applicants are absconding, their whereabouts are being traced, and there is prima facie material indicating their involvement. Thereafter, Crime No. 123/2025 has been registered at Police Station Charama against the applicants/accused for alleged offences. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegations essentially concern the validity of the forest patta, which is a civil-administrative issue already under challenge in appeal. The applicants neither forged signatures nor manipulated any government record, all documents originated from official authorities themselves. Despite the statutory appeal period 3 being alive, the FIR was hastily lodged, depriving the applicants of a fair opportunity to contest the cancellation. The Sessions Court’s observation of absconding is also incorrect, as the applicants were residing at their homes and had voluntarily approached the Court. He also submits that all relevant records are already with the government, and no recovery or custodial interrogation is required. The applicants are agriculturists, have no criminal antecedents, and are permanent residents with no likelihood of absconding or influencing evidence. Considering the nature of allegations and the moderate severity of punishment prescribed, arrest would serve no constructive purpose, making the case fit for grant of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the applicants are alleged to have fraudulently prepared forged Forest Rights pattas in collusion with others and thereby cheated the Government, causing a loss of Rs.5,17,773/-, further the applicants are absconding, and their involvement in the offence of forgery and cheating is prima facie reflected in the case diary, therefore, the applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of dispute and material available in case diary, and the fact that the applicants are alleged 4 to have fraudulently prepared forged Forest Rights pattas in collusion with others and thereby cheated the Government, causing a loss of Rs.5,17,773/-, but considering the fact that the applicants have no criminal antecedents, as such, without further commenting anything on merits, this Court find it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants – Suresh and Ishwari Poya, on executing a personal bond with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) They 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 them from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) They shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) They shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicants and the sureties shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) They shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil