1 2026:CGHC:1424 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 185 of 2026 1. Smt. Jhanak Devi @ Usha Devi W/o Bhaskar Singh Rajput Aged About 52 Years R/o Parsada, P.S. Pali, District Korba (C.G.) 2. Smt. Meena Bai W/o Satyanarayan Aged About 48 Years R/o Parsada, P.S. Pali, District Korba (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Pali, District Korba (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State. : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.01.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 312/2025 registered at Police Station Pali, District – Korba (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 316(5), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 18.08.2025 the complainant, namely Santosh Kumar Kanwar, who is a Food OfÏcer, lodged an F.I.R. against the present applicants and other co-accused ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.01.09 18:03:46 +0530 2 persons, stating that the accused, being the operators and sellers of the government fair price shop at Parsada, did not distribute 258.64 quintals of rice and 3.30 quintals of sugar, which were required to be distributed to the ration card holders allotted to the eligible persons. Thereafter, the police investigated the matter and arrested the applicants for the aforesaid offences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent persons who have been falsely implicated in the aforementioned case. He submits that the applicants are the seller and secretary of the fair price shop and that they have duly distributed the rice and sugar to the ration card holders. He further submits that the date of the incident is 19.07.2024, whereas the F.I.R. was registered on 18.08.2025, after a delay of 1 year, 1 month, and 23 days. He also submits that the applicants have only one criminal antecedent of a similar nature, which is pending trial. He further submits that the applicants have been in jail since 31.10.2025 and that the conclusion of the trial may take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that there is a delay of more than one year in lodging the present F.I.R. against the applicants, and further considering that the applicants have only one criminal antecedent of a similar nature, moreover, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in 3 the present case, the applicants have been languishing in jail since 31.10.2025, and the conclusion of the trial may take some more time. This Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let the Applicants – Smt. Jhanak Devi @ Usha Devi and Smt. Meena Bai involved in Crime No. 312/2025 registered at Police Station Pali, District – Korba (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 316(5), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under 4 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 applicants are deliberate or without sufÏcient 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. 8. OfÏce 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 Abhishek