1 2025:CGHC:54906 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5325 of 2025 D.R. Baghmare S/o Gopichand Baghmare, Aged About 56 Years R/o V.V. Colon Y Bihar Colony, Street No. 5, Mowa Raipur, District Raipur C.G. --- Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Baramkela, District Sarangarh - Bilaigarh C.G. --- Non-applicant MCRC No. 8700 of 2025 Ashish Patel S/o Late Arvind Patel Aged About 40 Years R/o Kelo Vihar Colony, Near Shiv Mandir, House Number 72/2400, District- Raigarh, C.G. Currently Residing At Indira Chowk, Barmkela, Police Station, Barmkela, District Sarangarh, Bilaigarh (C.G) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Baramkela, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) --- Non-applicant MCRC No. 7502 of 2025 Khir Das Mahant S/o Umashankar Mahant Aged About 31 Years R/o Makan No.216, Ward No.05 Deepapara, Sangitarai, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Baramkela Sarangarh, District : Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh 2 --- Non-Applicant MCRC No. 5325/2025 For Applicant : Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate MCRC No. 7502/2025 For Applicant : Mr. Gagan Tiwari, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate MCRC No. 8700/2025 For Applicant : Mr. Satish Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate along with Ms. Madhunisha Singh, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate SB : Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice ORDER ON BOARD 11/11/2025 1. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 53/2025 registered at Police Station – Baramkela, District – Sarangarh – Bilaigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 316 (5), 336 (3), 340 (2), 338, 318 (4) & 3 (5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution's case is that, present case arises from a complaint lodged by complainant Shri Arvind Shukla regarding alleged financial irregularities and embezzlement at the CG State Cooperative Bank Limited, Baramkela Branch, during the period from 01.04.2024 to 06.11.2024, wherein a total amount of Rs. 9,91,20,877.69/- was fraudulently withdrawn through 887 suspicious transactions affecting KCC and DMR accounts of 17 cooperative societies. During investigation, several bank officials and outsourced staff were implicated in the crime, including the present applicants, who worked as a Branch Manager, Clerk and Guard at the bank. It is alleged that the accused persons misused their bank IDs and colluded to fraudulently withdraw funds by generating fake vouchers, misusing DMR accounts, and transferring funds to their own and others' accounts. Thereafter, the applicants were arrested on 20.04.2025, 04.05.2025 & 10.05.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the respective applicants submit that the present 3 applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case, they have not committed any offence as alleged. Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan submits that the applicant in MCRC No. 5325/2025 had not committed the offence as alleged. He contended that the applicant is the Branch Manager of the Cooperative Bank, the wall letter form was being operated from the ID of applicant and because the applicant was having, the responsibility of bank manager, he had to go outside the bank and some times, he have to go outside the District and because of working of Bank should not be interrupted the ID of Bank was used to handover to Ashish Patel, who is also employee of Bank and the said ID would have been wrongly used by Ashish Patel along with other employees of Bank, whereas the applicant was not present in Branch, when these transaction taken place. He submits that the alleged acts were committed by the other co-accused persons when the applicant was not available in the Bank or at the time when the applicant was on leave and he was completely oblivious of the acts committed by the co-accused persons. He submits that the no recovery of articles have been made from the present applicant and thus, there is no direct evidence available against him in the charge-sheet. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, he submits that as per the knowledge of deponent there is no other criminal antecedent against the applicant. Applicant is in jail since 19.12.2025. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Mr. Gagan Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant in MCRC No. 7502/2025 submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant was only working as Danda Guard and therefore, he was not holding any position of responsibility which may commit such offence nor he was possessing any access to the system’s of the bank. He submits that the account holders from whose account, the transactions were made in the account of the applicant, have not been 4 examined. He submits that as per the memorandum statement of co- accused D.R. Baghmare, it is clear that the fradulent scheme was conceptualized and executed by the managerial and clearical staff of the bank by misusing their Maker ID and Checker ID log-in credientials to manipulate cooperative society accounts. Therefore, there was no role played by the applicant in commission of the aforesaid offence. The applicant has been impleaded only on the basis of memorandum statement and there is no seizure made from the possession of the applicant and in the FIR, there is no mention of the applicant. Investigation is complete, charge- sheet has already been filed before the competent Trial Court, thus is no chance of absconding of the applicant. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, there are no criminal antecedents against him, conclusion of the trial may take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 5. Mr. Satish Chandra Verma, learned senior counsel for the applicant in MCRC No. 8700/2025 submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant was only working as Clerk and the transactions were done under the instructions of the then Branch Manager who has admitted his guilt in the memorandum statement. He submits that there is no ingredient in the charge-sheet to showcase the commission of offence by the applicant. Therefore, there was no role played by the applicant in commission of the aforesaid offence. In support of his contention, he relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Manish Sisodia Vs. ED & CBI reported in (2024) SCC OnLine SC 920 and Hussainara Khatoon (I) Vs. State of Bihar reported in (1980) 1 SCC 81 The applicant has been impleaded only on the basis of memorandum statement. Investigation is complete, charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Trial Court. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, there are no criminal 5 antecedents against him, conclusion of the trial may take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 6. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that though the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case, but there specific allegations against the applicants of committing forgery and cheating by misappropriating funds and thereby withdrawing an amount of Rs. 9,91,20,877.69/- fraudulently through 887 suspicious transactions affecting KCC and DMR accounts of 17 cooperative societies. Based upon their statements, the applicants were impleaded in the present crime. However, he do not dispute the submission of counsel for the respective applicants regarding the criminal antecedents against the respective applicants and submits that the Applicant D.K. Baghmare has admitted his guilt in his memorandum statement. Therefore, they may not be granted bail. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents enclosed along with the bail application. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission of counsel for the respective parties and further, the fact that charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, period of pre-trial detention and the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Manish Sisodia (Supra) and Hussainara Khatoon (Supra), conclusion of the trial may takes some more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 9. Let the Applicants – D.R. Baghmare in MCRC No. 5325/2025, Khir Das Mahant in MCRC No. 7502/2025 and Ashsih Patel in MCRC No. 8700/2025, involved in Crime No. 53/2025 registered at Police Station – Baramkela, District – Sarangarh – Bilaigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 316 (5), 336 (3), 340 (2), 338, 318 (4) & 3 (5) of 6 the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond with two sureties 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 their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 7 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/-Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY