1 2026:CGHC:12124 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 268 of 2026 Bhuneshwar Sai S/o Shri Ghasia Sai, Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Khutsera, Police Station Tumla, District- Jashpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Tumla District- Jashpur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Sunil Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 13/03/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.01/2026, registered at Police Station Tumla, District- Jashpur (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 320, 336, 338, 61 of the B.N.S. 2023. GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2026.03.17 14:20:56 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 02.01.2026, the complainant Ramkumar Yadav, from Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Bank Limited, Nodal Office Jashpur, submitted a written complaint at Police Station Tumla stating that in Aadim Jati Seva Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Konpara, during the Kharif Marketing Year 2024–25, the Authorized Officer Bhuneshwar Sai along with Committee Manager Jayprakash Sahu, Fund In-charge Shishupal Yadav, Computer Operator Nitendra Sai, Assistant Fund In-charge Avinash Awasthi, and Assistant Fund In-charge Chandrakumar Yadav committed irregularities in the procurement of paddy, thereby causing financial loss to the Government. According to the online computer records of the centre, the total quantity of paddy was shown as 1,61,250.00 quintals, whereas the total quantity delivered to mills and storage centres was found to be 1,40,663.12 quintals. As per the records, the remaining quantity of 20,586.88 quintals of paddy was shown as pending for delivery. However, upon physical verification by the joint inspection team, a shortage of 20,586.88 quintals of paddy was found and the said quantity of paddy was not available at the spot. The paddy procurement centre Konpara thus reflected a shortage of 20,586.88 quintals, which amounts to Rs.6,38,19,322.80 calculated at the rate of Rs.3,100 per quintal. Additionally, there was a shortage of 4,898 gunny bags, valued at Rs.71.80 per bag (Rs.3,51,676.40), and 54,239 old gunny bags meant for millers/PDS, valued at Rs.25 per bag (Rs.13,55,975). Consequently, the committee suffered a total financial loss of Rs.6,55,26,979.40 on account of shortage of paddy and gunny bags. On the basis of the said report of the complainant, Crime No. 01/2026 was registered against the accused persons under Sections 3 318(4), 320, 336, 338 and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), and the matter was taken up for investigation. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated merely because he was nominated as the Prescribed Officer of the society on 28.11.2024 under Section 49(8) of the Co-operative Societies Act. It is submitted that as per the work distribution of the society, the Manager, Fad Prabhari and Computer Operator were responsible for procurement of paddy during the year 2024–25, and the applicant had no role in the purchase of paddy or the day-to-day business of the society. He would further submit that the applicant was nominated by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Jashpur on 28.11.2024, whereas the concerned officials had already been appointed for procurement work prior to his nomination. It is contended that the statement of Shishupal Yadav (Fad Prabhari) recorded during investigation clearly indicates that he and the Manager were responsible for the loss and that he has already deposited the amount before the millers to make the shortage nil. It is argued that the allegations in the FIR are general and omnibus, and no specific act of misappropriation, manipulation of records, or removal of stock has been attributed to the applicant. He further submits that the online procurement entries and portal operations were handled by the Computer Operator; therefore, any discrepancy between online records and physical stock cannot be attributed to the applicant. He would submit that the applicant is a permanent resident of address shown in the cause title, ready to cooperate with the investigation, and there is no likelihood of absconding or tampering with the prosecution 4 evidence, therefore 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. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel for the parties, materials available on record, considering the fact that applicant being a member of the Aadim Jati Seva Sahakari Samiti, in collusion with other co-accused persons, collectively committed irregularities in the procurement of paddy and gunny bags, and misappropriated an amount totaling Rs.6,55,26,979.40, including the value of paddy and gunny bags, thereby causing financial loss to the Government, offence being serious in nature and also considering the fact that investigation is still going on, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant - Bhuneshwar Sai, involved in Crime No.01/2026, registered at Police Station Tumla, District- Jashpur (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 320, 336, 338, 61 of the B.N.S. 2023 is rejected. Sd/-Sd S Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice gouri