1 2026:CGHC:22307 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 731 of 2026 Sandeep Kumar Dubey S/o Ramsharan Dubey Aged About 42 Years Resident Of Ward No.06 Mohlain Tahsil Nawagarh District- Bemetara (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House OfÏcer, Police Of Police Station Pathariya District- Mungeli (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ramsajiwan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Kumar Jaiswal, Deputy G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.05.2026 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. 87/2026 registered at Police Station Pathariya District- Mungeli, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5) and 3(5) fo the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, in brief is that during inspection conducted by the enquiry team at Paddy Purchase Centre, Dhardei, a shortage/misappropriation of 2156.08 quintals of paddy was RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 found, and on the basis of the said report, the present crime has been registered against the applicant, who is stated to be working as a computer operator, along with other co-accused persons. Hence, the present anticipatory bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant has neither committed nor participated in any act which may constitute the alleged offences. He further submits that the evidence collected by the prosecution does not prima facie make out a sufÏcient case to hold the applicant guilty of the alleged offences. It is also submitted that the applicant is working as a computer operator at Paddy Purchase Centre, Dhardei and has nothing to do with the alleged shortage/misappropriation of paddy. It is further submitted that the applicant is neither the custodian nor the in-charge of the paddy stock and his role is limited only to operating the computer at the said centre on the instructions of superior authorities. He also submits that the co-accused namely Kartik Ram Dhruv, who is posted as Society Manager, has already deposited the entire shortage of paddy at the Paddy Purchase Centre, Dhardei, which clearly indicates that the applicant has no role in the alleged shortage. The statement of Kartik Ram Dhruv and the report of deposit of paddy are collectively annexed as Annexure A-3. It is also submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. Hence, it is prayed that the applicant be granted anticipatory bail. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the non - applicant/State, opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the present case pertains to serious misappropriation of Government paddy to the extent of 2156.08 quintals, detected during inspection of Paddy Purchase Centre, Dhardei, which reflects large-scale irregularities affecting public funds. It is further submitted that the investigation has revealed the involvement of the applicant along with other co- accused persons in the said shortage and merely being designated as a computer operator does not absolve him from responsibility, as he was actively involved in maintaining records and entries relating to procurement and stock of paddy. Therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence, nature of allegations and requirement of proper investigation, the applicant is not entitled to anticipatory bail. 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 of allegations and the material available on record, it appears that the present case arises out of an alleged shortage/misappropriation of 2156.08 quintals of paddy detected during inspection of Paddy Purchase Centre, Dhardei, wherein the applicant is stated to be working as a computer operator. Further the fact that the role attributed to the applicant is primarily clerical in nature and there is nothing on record at this stage to show his direct involvement in the custody or misappropriation of paddy stock. Further as the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the co-accused Society 4 Manager has allegedly deposited the entire shortage of paddy, as reflected from Annexure A-3, and the fact that custodial interrogation of the applicant does not appear to be necessary for further investigation, coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is a permanent resident of the locality, Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant deserves to be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Sandeep Kumar Dubey on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting OfÏcer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The applicant 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 from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan