PAYAM SATYANARAYAN @ SHATRU v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
MCRC/7783/2025 · 2025-11-03
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 48448 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 48448 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2025:CGHC:53944
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7781 of 2025 C.H. Ramanna @ Chitturi S/o. C.H. Babaji Aged About 44 Years Then Posted As - Manager, Primary Minor Forest Produce Co-Operative Society, Palachalam, Forest Range - Sukma, Present R/o. Nayapara, Konta, P.S. and Tehsil - Konta, District Sukma (C.G.)
--- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Officer-In-Charge, Economic Offences Wing/ A.C.B. Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
--- Non-Applicant MCRC No. 7819 of 2025 Manoj Kawasi S/o Shri Hunga Aged About 41 Years Then Posted As - Manager, Primary Minor Forest Produce Co-Operative Society, Jaggawaram, Forest Range - Sukma, Present R/o. Village - Kolaiguda, P.S. Bhejji, Tehsil Konta, District - Sukma (C.G.)
---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In-Charge, Economic Offences Wing/ A.C.B. Raipur, District - Raipur, (C.G.)
--- Non-Applicant MCRC No. 7783 of 2025 Payam Satyanarayan @ Shatru S/o Late Shri Payam Reddy Aged About 50 Years Then Posted As, Manager, Primary Minor Forest Produce Co- Operative Society, Golapalli, Forest Range- Sukma Present R/o Golapalli, P.S. Gollaplli, Tehsil - Konta District- Sukma, (C.G.) Permanent R/o PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.11.06 13:24:10 +0530
2 Maraikudem, Ward No.01, Post- Gondpalli, P.S. Dhummaguden, District- Bhadradi-Kottagudem, Telangana.
---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Officer - In- Charge, Economic Offences Wing/ A.C.B. Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
--- Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Senior Advocate with Ms. Shivangi Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board 04/11/2025
1. Since the above-mentioned three bail applications arise out of same crime number, they are clubbed and heard together and are being
disposed of by this common order.
2. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 26/2025 registered at Police Station Economic Offences Wing/ A.C.B. Raipur, District- Raipur for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 467, 468, 471, 120B of Indian Penal Code and Section 13(1)A and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act.
3. As per the prosecution’s case, on 08.04.2025, an F.I.R. was lodged at the instance of Sanjay Dinkar Devasthale, Deputy Superintendent of Police, regarding incidents alleged to have occurred between 01.01.2021 and 08.04.2025. The F.I.R. was based on facts revealed during the investigation of a complaint filed by Abdul
3 Sheikh Karim (R-Number 56/2025), alleging that Rs. 6.50 crores of bonus amounts meant for tendu leaf collectors were fraudulently withdrawn by Ashok Patel, Forest Division Officer, Sukma, in collusion with other Forest Department officials and managers of various Primary Minor Forest Produce Committees. A six-member committee constituted by the State authorities investigated the complaint and submitted a report. The report revealed that on 24.08.2023, the District Forest Produce Cooperative Federation Limited, Sukma, wrote to the Chief Conservator of Forests and the Chief General Manager, requesting cash payments of incentive remuneration for the 2021 and 2022 seasons. For the 2021 season, payments totaling Rs. 4,53,73,136/- were proposed for 15 committees, out of which Rs. 1,37,61,125/- was deposited into the accounts of 10,131 collectors, while Rs. 3,16,12,011/- was to be paid in cash to 21,225 collectors. For the 2022 season, payments totaling Rs. 3,32,71,375/- were proposed for 10 committees, out of which Rs. 74,11,400/- was deposited into the accounts of 5,739 collectors, and Rs. 2,58,59,975/- was to be paid in cash to 13,179 collectors. Thus, a total of Rs. 5,74,71,986/- was to be paid in cash, out of which about Rs. 2 crores are unaccounted for. The investigation further revealed that officials of 8 out of 17 Primary Minor Forest Produce Cooperative Societies withdrew Rs. 3,92,14,362/- on various dates but did not distribute the amount to tendu leaf collectors. Instead, they allegedly prepared forged documents showing false disbursement and used them as genuine. It was therefore found that the accused officials, acting in collusion,
4 misappropriated public funds on a large scale.
4.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. He further submitted that the applicants have not been named in the FIR. They also submitted that seven co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17.09.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 6950/2025, 6978/2025, 6956/2025, 6449/2025, 6359/2025, 6347/2025 and 6500/2025. He further submits that the applicants have no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed and they are in jail since 25.06.2025 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicants but could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court. He also submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present cases. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, allegations levelled against the applicants and the fact that seven co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17.09.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 6950/2025, 6978/2025, 6956/2025, 6449/2025, 6359/2025, 6347/2025 and 6500/2025, further the applicants have no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed and they are
5 in jail since 25.06.2025, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicants - C.H. Ramanna @ Chitturi (in MCRC No. 7781/2025), Manoj Kawasi (in MCRC No. 7819/2025) and Payam Satyanarayan @ Shatru (in MCRC No.7783/2025) involved in Crime No. 26/2025 registered at Police Station Economic Offences Wing/ A.C.B. Raipur, District- Raipur for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 467, 468, 471, 120B of Indian Penal Code and Section 13(1)A and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.
In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence,
6 proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice Preeti