1 2026:CGHC:21419 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3412 of 2026 Anil Sinha S/o. Shri Hira Prasad Sinha Aged About 46 Years Post- Assistant Grade-2, Executive Engineer, Chhattisgarh Housing Board Division, Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) R/o Bhatapara, Near Santoshi Mandir, Behind District Hospital, Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ambikapur, Unit, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sourabh Kumar Pande, Deputy Advocate General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07/05/2026 1. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the defaults pointed out by the Registry have not been cured. AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 2. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 07/2026 registered at Police Station Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ambikapur, Unit, District- Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Ravi Kumar Bani submitted a written complaint alleging that the main accused, Poonam Chand Agrawal, demanded a bribe of Rs.60,000/- for recommending the final extension of time and conducting physical verification of the construction work executed by the complainant. It is alleged that on 05.02.2026, when the complainant met Poonam Chand Agrawal, he instructed the complainant to hand over the amount to the present applicant. Pursuant to a trap organized by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ambikapur Unit, District Surguja (C.G.), a sum of Rs.5,000/- was allegedly recovered from the possession of the present applicant. Hence, the bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that identically situated co- accused, namely, Poonam Chand Agrawal has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.04.2026 passed in 3 MCRC No.3215 of 2026. He also submits that the present applicant has already been suspended from the service. The applicant is in jail since 05.02.2026, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the allegation against the applicant is that pursuant to the demand allegedly made by the main accused, Poonam Chand Agrawal, the applicant accepted an amount of Rs.5,000/- from the complainant on his behalf, which was subsequently recovered during the trap proceedings conducted by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ambikapur Unit, District Surguja (C.G.). However, could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused, Poonam Chand Agrawal has already been granted bail by this Court. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 05.02.2026, the fact that though the allegation against the applicant is that pursuant to the demand allegedly made by the main accused, Poonam Chand Agrawal, the applicant accepted 4 an amount of Rs.5,000/- from the complainant on his behalf, which was subsequently recovered during the trap proceedings conducted by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ambikapur Unit, District Surguja (C.G.), but considering the fact that the applicant has already been suspended from the service and co-accused, namely, Poonam Chand Agrawal has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.04.2026 passed in MCRC No.3215 of 2026, the case of present applicant is identical to that of the said co-accused and the has no criminal antecedents, the charge- sheet has been filed, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 9. 8. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 9. Let the Applicant-Anil Sinha, involved in Crime No. 07/2026 registered at Police Station Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ambikapur, Unit, District- Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 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 5 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 him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. 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 209 of the 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. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil