1 2026:CGHC:19356 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3592 of 2026 1. Satyendra Kumar Prajapati S/o Shri Balam Sai Prajapati Aged About 40 Years R/o Kadambahra, Police Chowki Pondi Bachra, P.S. Baikunthpur, Distt. Koriya, Chhattisgarh. 2. Ravindra Kumar Prajapati S/o Shri Balam Sai Prajapati Aged About 36 Years R/o Kadambahra, Police Chowki Pondi Bachra, P.S. Baikunthpur, Distt. Koriya, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Incharge of Police Chowki Pondi Bachra, P.S. Baikunthpur, Distt. Koriya, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pawan Shrivastava and Mr. Sapnomoy Chattopadhyay, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.04.2026 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. - 98/2026, registered at Police Station – Baikunthpur, District – Koriya (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 105 and 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya 2 Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution is that, on the basis of information given by Mohit Lal Ghasiya on 21.02.2026, a merg was registered. It is alleged that on the same day, between 5:00 and 6:00 PM, when Mohit Lal Ghasiya and his wife were making bricks for the construction of the applicant’s house, their child, aged about 1½ years, who was playing nearby, accidentally drowned in a pit filled with water, which had been dug and filled by the complainant himself during brick-making activities. It is further submitted that the Assistant Sub-Inspector, namely Guru Prasad Yadav, who arrived for investigation of the said merg, allegedly threatened the applicants that he would implicate them in a false case relating to the child’s death on the ground that the pit was dug and filled with water for their construction work without adequate safety measures, thereby making them responsible for the incident. It is alleged that he demanded a sum of Rs.50,000/- to refrain from initiating criminal proceedings against them. Thereafter, Applicant No. 1 lodged a complaint against the said A.S.I. on 22.02.2026 before the Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ambikapur. Pursuant to the said complaint, the A.C.B. team conducted an investigation and, on 24.02.2026, laid a trap, resulting in the arreest of A.S.I. Guru Prasad Yadav and S.I. Abdul Munaf. They were arrested, and an FIR was registered as Crime No. 11/2026 for offences punishable under Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018). Subsequently, by way of a counterblast, an FIR was registered against the present applicants on 26.03.2026 at Police Station Baikunthpur, bearing Crime No. 98/2026, for offences punishable under Sections 105 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicants were arrested in connection with the said case and are presently in judicial custody. 3 3. The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the FIR against the applicants shows that it has been registered on the basis of a complaint made by Mohit Lal Ghasiya, the father of the deceased child. However, the death of the child by drowning in the pit was purely accidental. An information in this regard was given by Mohit Lal Ghasiya at Police Chowki Pondi Bachra, upon which a merg was registered and his statement was recorded. In his statement, he clearly stated that while he and his wife were making bricks, their child, who was playing nearby, accidentally fell into the pit and died due to drowning, and not due to any other reason. He also submits that while the A.S.I. and S.I. threatened the applicants with implicating them in a criminal case and demanded Rs.50,000/- to save them, the applicants approached the Anti-Corruption Bureau. The A.C.B. took action against the said A.S.I. and S.I., and only thereafter, the present FIR has been lodged against the applicants as a counterblast. It is further contended that the charge-sheet has not been filed and the applicants have no previous criminal antecedents. He further submits that applicant No. 1 is in jail since 29.03.2026 and applicant No. 2 is in jail since 28.03.2026. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, learned counsel prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has not been filed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicants, the 4 fact that the then Assistant Sub-Inspector Guru Prasad Yadav and Sub- Inspector Shri Abdul Munaf, who had arrived to investigate the merg, allegedly demanded an illegal gratification of Rs. 50,000/- from the applicants and threatened to implicate them in a false case relating to the death of a child, later, they continued to harass them by reducing the demand of Rs.25,000/-, subsequently, applicant No. 1 had lodged a complaint before the Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ambikapur on 22.02.2026, pursuant to which a trap was laid on 24.02.2026, resulting in the apprehension and arrest of the said A.S.I. Guru Prasad Yadav along with S.I. Abdul Munaf, and an FIR being registered against them under Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018), in the aforesaid factual background, the possibility of the present FIR having been registered as a counterblast to the complaint made by the applicants cannot be ruled out at this stage, further that the charge-sheet has not yet been filed before the competent Court, that the applicants have no previous criminal antecedents, and applicant No. 1 has been in custody since 29.03.2026 and applicant No. 2 since 28.03.2026, and considering the overall circumstances, this Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for grant of bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 - Satyendra Kumar Prajapati and Ravindra Kumar Prajapati, involved inCrime No. - 98/2026, registered at Police Station – Baikunthpur, District – Koriya (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 105 and 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 5 (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants 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 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 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 them in accordance with law. 6 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti