1 2025:CGHC:9125 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 732 of 2025 • Kapoorsingh Dhruv S/o Foolsingh Dhruv Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Bhaluchunwa, Police Station And Tahsil Bagbahra, District Mahsamund (C.G.). ... Applicant. versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Bagbahra, District Mahsamund (C.G.). ... State/Respondent. For Applicant : Ms. Manisha Yadav, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Shri Ankur Kashyap, Deputy Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 21/02/2025 1. This First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS, 2023’) has been filed by the applicant as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.200/2018 registered at Police Station- Bagbahra, District Mahsamund Chhattisgarh for the offence punishable under AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2025.02.22 10:32:17 +0530 2 Sections 409, 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66 of Information Technology Act, 2000. 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 05.09.2018, a written report was submitted by the complainant CEO Janpad panchayat Bagbahra before the police station alleging that he has been posted as CEO, Bagbahra since the year 2017 and Mr. Krishna Kumar Kaivart was posted at that place as Data Entry operator at collector rate. District level investigation team submitted its report, against embezzlement of lakhs of rupees on account of irregularities in the online website of Mahatma Gandhi Scheme. According to findings given in the investigation report, KK Kaivart, Data Entry Operator has embezzled an amount of Rs.22,83,383/- between the period from 17.08.2015 to 17.06.2017 and transferred the same to his own account. During the investigation, he stated that he has given some amount to the present applicant also, based on which, the police registered an offence and arrested the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that allegation of embezzlement is against co-accused namely Krishna Kumar Kaivart, who was working as a Data Entry Operator in Janpad panchayat, Bagbahra; the embezzled amount has been received by him in his own bank account; and further, no amount has been received by the present applicant. She also submits that though an allegation has been levelled against the present applicant that some money was handed over to him but after arrest of the 3 present applicant, neither any recovery was effected from him, nor any memorandum statement has been recorded. She would further submit that in a notice issued to co-accused Krishna Kumar Kaivart under Section 91 of Cr.PC, the name of the present applicant has also been reflected. He further submits that the alleged incident is said to have taken place in the year 2018 and at the relevant time, the present applicant was performing his duties as an Accountant in Janpad Panchayat, Bagbahra and he never absconded. He also submits that the prosecution is unable to collect any admissible evidence against the applicant, who is in jail since 08.01.2025 and is the only breadwinner of his family. Learned counsel submits that at present, as the applicant is in judicial remand, no further investigation is required to be conducted against him and as such, he is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and he is also ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions which may be imposed by this Court while granting bail. Therefore, the bail application may be allowed. 4. Shri Ankur Kashyap, learned State counsel would oppose the submission made by counsel for the applicant and would submit that there is an embezzlement of Rs. 22,83,383/- under the Mahatma Gandhi Rashtriya Gramin Rojgar Guarantee Yojana. The said amount was embezzled by co-accused Krishna Kumar Kaivart, who received the same in his account and to him, when a notice under Section 91 of Cr.PC was given, he informed about 4 payment of some amount to the present applicant also, therefore, involvement of the present applicant cannot be ruled out, as the investigation is going on. Hence, this bail application may be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submission made at the bar as also considering the evidence collected by the prosecution against the present applicant, this Court is inclined to allow this bail application. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court on the condition that – a) He shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance. b) He shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses. c) He shall cooperate with the investigation. If any of the aforesaid conditions is violated, the State/complainant would be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Avinash