1 2025:CGHC:55200 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9043 of 2025 Ku. Seema Vaare D/o Lt. Muritram Vaare Aged About 26 Years R/o Singhanpur Thana Kosir District Sarangarh Bilaigarh (Chhattisgarh) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Kosir District - Sarangarh - Bilaigarh (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. F.S. Khare, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Swajeet Ubeja, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.94/2025, registered at Police Station- Kosir, District– Sarangarh – Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5), 3(5), 61(2)(b) of the BNS. MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.11.13 10:54:47 +0530 2 2. Prosecution story in brief is that on 09.03.2025 pursuant to order of the Collector Sarangarh- Bilaigarh, a 5 member committee was constituted with a direction to conduct an inspection at the paddy procurement Centre Kosir. During inspection a shortage of 3043.22 quintal of paddy worth Rs. 94,33,982/- was detected. Thereafter on 22.03.2025 an F.I.R. No. 94/2025 was registered at P.S. Kosir under section under Section 318(4), 316(5), 3(5), Of B.N.S. against the accused persons who were members of co- operative Society of paddy centre Kosir. It was alleged accused persons made fake purchase entries for 3043.22 quintal of paddy worth Rs. 94,33,982/- and that out of this, 2847.60 quintal were shown as purchase from 33 farmers to never physically visited the procurement center. 3. The allegation against the present applicant is that her name is among those 33 farmers in their bank account the money has been transferred. It is further alleged that the applicant has transferred Rs. 1,47,980/- in the account of accused Rahul Kumar Tandon through UPI transaction. Based on this the applicant has been implicated in this case and she has been arrested on 30.08.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, having no connection whatsoever with the alleged offence. It is submitted that a total amount of Rs.3,12,480/- was transferred 3 into the applicant’s bank account, whereas only Rs.1,64,500/- was required to be transferred. The co-accused Rahul Kumar Tandon informed the applicant that an excess amount had been credited to her account by mistake and requested her to refund the same, upon which the applicant refunded Rs.1,47,980/- to his bank account. It is further submitted that other co-accused persons, including farmers and office bearers of the Paddy Procurement Centre, Kosir, have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Hon’ble Court, copies of which are filed with the bail application. So far as criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, she has no previous criminal antecedents registered against her. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 30.08.2025, the charge sheet has already been filed and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, prays for her release on bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant but could not dispute the fact that various co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that other co-accused persons, including farmers and office bearers of the Paddy Procurement Centre, Kosir, have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, copies of which are filed with the 4 bail application and applicant has no previous criminal antecedents registered against her, the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.08.2025 and though the charge-sheet has already been filed, conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let applicant, Ku. Seema Vaare, involved in Crime No.94/2025, registered at Police Station- Kosir, District– Sarangarh – Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5), 3(5), 61(2)(b) of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant 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 applicant 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 them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 5 during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice 0. Manpreet