1 2026:CGHC:13845 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2457 of 2026 * - Shrawan Kumar Markam Alias S.K Markam S/o Late Bikau Ram Markam Aged About 62 Years R/o Shiv Mandir Mahuapara Ward No 04 Police Station Gandhinagar Ambikapur District- Surguja Chhattisgarh, ... Applicant Versus * - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer Police Station Basantpur District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Pathak, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Anil Pandey, Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 23/03/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for the grant of regular bail pertaining to Crime No.50/2020 registered at outpost Wadrafnagar, Police Station Basantpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.), for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 409 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7(1-13) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 2. In the present case, charge sheet has been filed. The total number of accused persons is 05 and 03 have been enlarged on bail and 01 is absconding. 3. As per prosecution case, the applicant at the relevant time was Chief Executive Officer of Janpad Panchayat, Wadrafnagar. It is alleged that Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.03.24 11:50:53 +0530 2 the applicant in connivance with other co-accused persons defalcated an amount to the tune of Rs.30,02,449/- by making payment to various agencies without the work having been actually carried out at villages Pendari, Chapota, Gudru and Jamai. Based on such allegations, F.I.R. was registered on 30.04.2020. 4. Mr. Sanjay Pathak, learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the applicant got retired from services on 31.05.2025. Thereafter sanction was accorded by the department and the applicant was arrested on 10.02.2026. He would submit that 03 co-accused have already been enlarged on regular bail. He would contend that the present applicant is innocent person and he has falsely been implicated in the case. He would submit that the digital signature of the applicant was misused by his subordinate. He would pray for grant of bail. 5. On other hand, Mr. Anil Pandey, learned Government Advocate appearing for the non-applicant/State would oppose. It is contended that the present applicant was the main culprit of whole scam. He would submit that the applicant used his digital signature while making payment to various suppliers though no work was carried out. He would further submit that 01 co-accused is absconding. He would submit that the application deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the case diary and material available on record. 7. F.I.R. was registered on 30.04.2020. The applicant got retired from service on 31.05.2025 and thereafter he was arrested on 10.02.2026. Charge sheet has been filed against other co-accused persons. 03 co- 3 accused persons namely Ashwini Tiwari, Hari Yadav and Kunjlal Sahu have already been enlarged on bail. 8. Taking into consideration the allegation made against the present applicant and further considering the fact that the co-accused persons have already been granted regular bail, I feel inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- I. He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such fact to the Court; II. He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial; III. He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till the disposal of the trial; and, IV. He shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature in future. 10. The observation made in the course of this order is only for considering the case of the applicant on the application for the grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by any observation made in the course of this order. 11. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti