1 2026:CGHC:3670 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10394 of 2025 Devanand Sahu S/o Shehar Lal Sahu Aged About 32 Years R/o - Rasauta, Janjgir-Champa, District - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Nandini, District Durg (C.G.) (Wrongly Mentioned As Police Station - Nandini Nagar In Covering Memo Of Impugned Order And In The Contents Of The Impugned Order) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21/01/2026 1. 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. 201/2025 registered at Police Station Nandini Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 3(5), 111(2) of BNS and Section 66(C), 61(2) of I.T. Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, Radheshyam VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.22 12:14:16 +0530 2 Verma, posted as Tahsildar at Tahsil Office, Ahiwara, lodged a written report at Police Station Nandini alleging that certain persons had fraudulently obtained User I.D. Code No. PAT 430600016 allotted to Patwari Krishna Kumar Sinha and, by misusing the same, prepared forged online and revenue documents relating to land bearing Khasra Nos. 1051/23, 1051/24, 1051/25, 1546/4, and 1546/5, admeasuring 5.9750 hectares, situated at Village Achhoti, Tahsil Ahiwara, recorded in the name of Dinu Ram Yadav in the Kissan Kitab, on the basis of which the said Dinu Ram Yadav obtained a loan from the State Bank of India, Branch Nandini Nagar, District Durg, and the loan amount was subsequently transferred to multiple bank accounts; upon complaints regarding discrepancies, verification of revenue records revealed that the signatures in the Kissan Kitab, Form-C, and Patwari Report were forged and did not belong to the concerned Patwari or Tahsildar, and further inquiry showed that the said Kissan Kitab had not been issued by the Kanungo Department, pursuant to which an inquiry report was submitted to the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Bhilai-3, leading to deletion of the suspected khasra numbers from online records and registration of offences against Dinu Ram Yadav, S. Ram Banjare, and others, wherein the present applicant is alleged to have assisted the co-accused by tampering with the State’s software system and procuring OTPs for forging the online records, and was accordingly arrested on 25.11.2025 for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 3(5), and 111(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 66C and 61(2) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not 3 committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. She further submits as the essential ingredients of the alleged offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 are not made out against him. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 25.11.2025 and has been apprehended merely on the basis of the memorandum statements of the co-accused persons, without any independent or corroborative evidence, and there is no material on record to show that the applicant received any amount in his bank account or derived any benefit from the alleged transaction. Further, similarly placed co-accused persons, namely, Nandkishore Sahu and Shiyankhik Verma, have already been granted regular and anticipatory bail respectively by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 06.11.2025 passed in MCRC No. 7828/2025 and order dated 23.09.2025 passed in MCRCA No. 1483/2025, copies whereof are annexed herewith as Annexure A/2. She further submits that in the order dated 09.01.2025 passed by this Hon’ble Court granting bail to Girdhar Banjare, it has been observed that the charge-sheet had been filed; however, in the present case, the charge-sheet has not yet been submitted. The applicant is a permanent resident of Village Rasauta, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), there is no likelihood of his absconding, and he undertakes to furnish adequate surety and to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the applicant allegedly along with other co- accused persons, prepared and used forged documents for illegally 4 recording their names over government land in the revenue records and, on the basis of such forged documents, obtained Kisan Credit Card (K.C.C.) loan facilities from the bank, thereby committing the alleged offences, further the applicant has one criminal antecedent, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents appended with the bail application. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the fact that the identically situated co-accused, namely, Girdhar Banjare, has already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 184 of 2026 vide order dated 09.01.2025, the absence of any criminal antecedents on the part of the applicant, and he is in jail since 25.11.2026, and further considering that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant- Devanand Sahu, involved in Crime No. 201/2025 registered at Police Station Nandini Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 3(5), 111(2) of BNS and Section 66(C), 61(2) of I.T. 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 5 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. 9. 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 vaibhav