1 2026:CGHC:5271 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 153 of 2026 Krishna Kumar Jaiswal S/o Ramkesh Jaiswal Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Harra Toli, Post- Ghugri Khurd, Belsar Police Station- Shankargarh, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. P.S.- Shankargarh, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Chitendra Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 30.01.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 0005/2026 registered at Police Station – Shankargarh District – Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 3(5), 318, 319, 336, 338, 340, 62 of the BNS 2023. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.31 18:04:44 +0530 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that, on 09.01.2026 a written complaint was made at Shankargarh, District Balrampur–Ramanujganj (C.G.) by Jaipal Singh Kanwar, working as a Food Inspector in the SDM Office, Shankargarh, stating that on 07.01.2026 information was received that paddy was being sold in the name of another farmer at Jamdi Committee. Pursuant to the said information, an investigation was conducted by a joint team of the Food and Revenue Departments, during which Krishna Jaiswal and Pardeshi Gaharwar were found attempting to sell paddy in the name of farmer Phulsai Lakda by fraudulently getting a token issued and forging his signature in the absence of the said farmer. During the investigation, 120 sacks of paddy weighing approximately 48 quintals were seized from the possession of Pardeshi Gaharwar. It further emerged during the entire investigation that Krishna Jaiswal and Pardeshi Gaharwar were jointly attempting to sell paddy fraudulently in the account of farmer Phulsai Lakda. Thereafter, upon authorization by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) to register a First Information Report, vide reference letter dated 08.01.2026, Crime No. 0005/2026 was registered against the present applicant/accused and co-accused Pardeshi Gaharwar for offences punishable under Sections 3(5), 318, 319, 336, 338, 340 and 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. It is respectfully submitted that the present applicant has neither committed any offence nor participated in the commission of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated in the present crime solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused, Pardeshi Gaharwar. It is further submitted that at a paddy procurement centre/society, paddy can be deposited by any person in the account of 3 a land-holding farmer registered with the centre; however, the support price amount is credited only to the bank account of the land owner, and no person other than the land owner can withdraw the said amount without his knowledge or permission. In the present case, the essential ingredients of the offence of cheating are not made out, as there is only an allegation regarding deposit of paddy in the agricultural account of a farmer, and even then, the statement of the actual land owner, namely Phulsai Lakda, has not been recorded by the prosecution, and reliance has been placed only on the statement of his son, Ritesh Lakda. It is submitted that the land owner Phulsai Lakda and his son are in fact debtors of the present applicant, having taken a loan from him which has not been repaid till date, and the denial made by the son is only with an intention to evade repayment of the said debt, hence, the applicant deserves the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that the present applicant has as many as 11 criminal antecedents, out of which four cases pertain to offences under the IPC registered in the years 2006, 2007, 2015 and 2019, and seven cases are under the Istgasha Act. It was further submitted that the anticipatory bail application of the co-accused has already been rejected. On these grounds, it was argued that the applicant is a habitual offender and, therefore, is not entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and the material available on record in the case diary, and further considering that the applicant has as many as 11 criminal antecedents, out of which four cases relate to offences under the IPC registered in the years 2006, 2007, 2015 and 2019 and seven cases are under the Istgasha Act, as well as the fact that the anticipatory bail application of the co-accused has already been rejected, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is a habitual offender. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Krishna Kumar Jaiswal, involved in Crime No. 0005/2026 registered at Police Station – Shankargarh District – Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 3(5), 318, 319, 336, 338, 340, 62 of the BNS 2023, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav