1 2026:CGHC:21637 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4299 of 2026 Devendra Kumar Palke S/o Gulabchand Palke Aged About 37 Years R/o Dharampura Ward No. 14, Kargi Road, Kota, Police Station- Kota, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Kota, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Gaurav Singhal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 171/2026, registered at Police Station – Kota, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the complainant, Narendra Singh Mishra, lodged an FIR at Police Station Kota, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), against the present applicant Devendra Kumar Palke working as Peon and co- accused Navel Singh Paikra, working as Accountant/Assistant Grade-II, in the Block Education Office, Kota. It is RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 alleged that both, being public servants, in furtherance of their common intention, embezzled government funds by fraudulently withdrawing an amount of Rs. 25,04,422/- during the period from September, 2024 further sum of Rs. a to February, 2025 and 4,57,800/- from March 2025 to November 2025, thereby causing a total loss of Rs. 29,62,222/- to the State exchequer, purportedly by forging salary records and misusing their official position. On the basis of these allegations, the aforesaid FIR has been lodged. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has not been filed in this case. It is submitted that the co-accused person has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 10.04.2026 in MCRCA No.462/2026. The applicant is in jail since 14.04.2026 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has not been filed in this case, and the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present 3 applicant, charge-sheet has not been filed against the applicant, but the co-accused person has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 10.04.2026 in MCRCA No.462/2026, the applicant is in jail since 14.04.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Devendra Kumar Palke, involved in Crime No. 171/2026, registered at Police Station – Kota, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 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 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. 4 (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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar