1 2026:CGHC:2825 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 571 of 2026 Guruwari Rathiya W/o Late Amar Singh Rathiya Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Runwaful, P.S. Kapu, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In-Charge Police Station Kapu Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Vinod Kumar Tekam, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 16.01.2026 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 89/2025, registered at Police Station - Kapu District – Raigarh (C.G.) VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.16 17:52:08 +0530 2 for the offence punishable under Sections 316(5), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 3 & 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 10.06.2025, the Food Inspector of Tahsil Kapu, Ms. Sudharani Chauhan, lodged a complaint at Police Station Kens alleging that Naya Benhe Group was operating government fair price shops in villages Runwaful, Chudha and Kamosindad, where serious irregularities were detected in the distribution and stock of essential commodities. During inspection, discrepancies were found in village Runwaful in respect of 533.81 quintals of rice, 0.27 quintal of sugar, 3.8 quintals of chana and 2.42 quintals of refined salt, involving an amount of Rs. 22,39,525/-. Similar irregularities were found in village Chanha relating to 4.33 quintals of APL rice, 309.2 quintals of BPL rice and 1.40 quintals of sugar amounting to Rs. 13,10,046.07/-, and in village Kamosindad in respect of 14.12 quintals of APL rice, 432.55 quintals of BPL rice and 1.72 quintals of refined salt. Thus, according to the prosecution, food grains worth a total of Rs. 54,17,278.24 were misappropriated, and on the basis of these allegations, the present case was registered and investigation was initiated against the persons concerned. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that tin the present case despite having no criminal antecedents whatsoever. It is pertinent to mention that the applicant was never vested with any financial or managerial powers of the fair price shop, and the main allegations are, in fact, against the President of the Self Help Group, namely Tuleshwari Chauhan, who 3 was responsible for the management and operation of the shop and has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 15.07.2025 in M.Cr.C.(A) No. 1031 of 2025, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has not been filed in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the present applicant, and also taking into account that the co-accused, namely Tuleshwari Chauhan, has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 15.07.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.(A) No. 1031 of 2025, and further considering that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 10.12.2025 and that the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let applicant, Guruwari Rathiya, involved in Crime No. 89/2025, registered at Police Station - Kapu District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 316(5), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 3 & 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 4 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 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. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. S Sd/- Sd/-d/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav