1 2025:CGHC:57291 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1847 of 2025 Konam Shriharsha S/o Radhav Rao Aged About 35 Years R/o SVB Square Apartment, Nidamanuru Road, Poranki District- Krishna Andra Pradesh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- Katekalyan, District- Dantewada (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Sr. Advocate with Shri Shashwat Mishra, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Jitendra Shrivastava, GA and Smt. Smriti Shrivastava, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 25/11/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suruksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.42/2024 registered at Police Station Katekalyan, District GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.11.27 11:20:28 +0530 2 Dantewada (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 127(4),143(1)(2)(3)(4)(5), 146 of B.N.S & SECTION 75 OF Juvenile Justice Act and Section 14(1)(a) of Child Labour Prohibition Act. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the F.I.R. of the incident was lodged by Prema Mandawi, on 20.10.2024, the F.I.R. was lodged inter alia on the allegations that, the manager of the fish and pawn company namely Rajahmundry Prawn Company, located at Bhimavaram Kurtevelli, by playing fraud and coercion hired the labour and minor children by promising them to give good employment in fish and pawn farm and promised the victim/labour that they will get the good wages(money), daily food and medical treatment but it was alleged that manager of the company used to exploit and ill-treat the labour and children, who all are engaged in the labour work in fish and pawn farm, it has also been alleged that manager of the company used to locked the children and labour inside the company premises like bonded labour and forced them to work without giving the wages(money) and no food for their livelihood. On the basis of the said allegation the FIR has been registered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated and has not committed any offence. It is argued that the FIR was initially against unknown persons, and the applicant’s name was added later merely because he works as a supervisor at the fish and prawn farm, although he has no 3 role in engaging labour or paying wages. There is no specific allegation or material in the charge-sheet linking the applicant to the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the co-accused L. Shriniwas and A. Suresh have already faced trial in Sessions Case No. 25/2025 and have been acquitted on 18.06.2025. He would submit that the applicant was unaware of the FIR, has never absconded, and has continuously worked at the fish farm. He would submit that the applicant is a permanent resident of Andhra Pradesh and there is no chance of his absconding, hence he prays to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and he would submit that the trial of the applicant was separated as the charge sheet was submitted against him as an absconder as well as supplementary charge sheet was also submitted against him as an absconder. 5. On a pointed query being made from learned counsel for the applicant as to why his trial was separated, he could not give a satisfactory reply. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the conduct of the applicant that he absconded from the clutches of law and case is of the year 2024 and he has come up before this Court for grant of anticipatory bail after the acquittal 4 of the co-accused persons, this Court does not find it to be a fit case to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 8. The Supreme Court, in Lavesh v. State (NCT of Delhi), reported in {(2012) 8 SCC 730} and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pradeep Sharma, reported in {(2014) 2 SCC 171}, has observed that where the accused has been declared as an absconder and has not cooperated with the investigation, he should not be granted anticipatory bail. 9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant - Konam Shriharsha, filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suruksha Sanhita, 2023, involved in Crime No.42/2024 registered at Police Station Katekalyan, District Dantewada (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 127(4),143(1)(2)(3)(4)(5),146 of B.N.S & SECTION 75 OF Juvenile Justice Act and Section 14(1)(a) of Child Labour Prohibition Act, is rejected. Sd/-Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice gouri