1 2026:CGHC:22080 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4207 of 2026 Abdul Munaf S/o Mo. Saddiq Aged About 58 Years R/o- Rasulpur, Ambikapur, District- Surguja, C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of C.G. Through - A.C.B. Unit, Ambikapur, District- Surguja, C.G. Through The Police Station- Eo./n/acb, Raipur, ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pawan Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-Applicant(s) : Dr. Sourabh K. Pande, Dy. Adv. Gen. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 11/05/2026 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. 11/2026 registered at Police Station- E.O.W. / Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act. 2. As per the prosecution case, a complaint was lodged by one Satyendra Kumar Prajapati before the OfÏce of Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ambikapur, alleging that the present applicant and co- KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 accused, namely Guru Prasad Yadav, were demanding an amount of ₹25,000/- from the complainant for not implicating him in a criminal case. For verification of the complaint, a digital voice recorder was provided to the complainant, in which the conversation regarding the demand of ₹25,000/- by the co-accused was recorded. Thereafter, a trap proceeding was planned for 23.02.2026. Subsequently, on 24.02.2026, the applicant/accused called the complainant and asked him to pay the bribe amount as decided by the co-accused. Thereafter, on 24.02.2026, the applicant/accused was caught red-handed while accepting the bribe amount of ₹25,000/-, and thereafter, he was arrested. On the basis of the evidence available against the applicant and the co- accused, a Zero FIR was registered by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, Unit Ambikapur, and subsequently Crime No. 11/2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018) was registered at Police Station E.O.W./A.C.B., Raipur. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed on 24.04.2026. 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 no complaint has been made against the present applicant and he has never demanded any bribe from any person. He further submits that, as per the prosecution case itself, the allegation regarding demand of ₹25,000/- pertains to the co- accused, namely Guru Prasad Yadav, and no allegation of demand of bribe has been levelled against the present applicant. It is also 3 submitted that the involvement of the applicant has been alleged only during the course of the trap proceedings conducted by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, and the said proceedings, including the alleged recovery and other related aspects, are matters of evidence which are required to be proved during the course of trial. He further submits that the investigation has already been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court therefore, there is no possibility of the applicant interfering with the prosecution evidence, and no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in judicial custody. It is also submitted that the applicant is in custody since 24.02.2026, he is the sole earning member of his family, and his continued detention has caused severe financial and social hardship to his dependent family members. It is further submitted that no prior allegations have ever been made against him and now he has been suspended from services further he has no criminal antecedent and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. He further submits that applicant is directly involved in a case of taking bribe from the complainant, which was a trap laid down by the ACB, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Considering the submissions and records, it is clear that the applicant has been in custody since 24.02.2026, has no previous criminal history and has already been suspended from service. The investigation is complete, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and there is no likelihood of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses and further custodial interrogation is not required. In view of these facts, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Abdul Munaf, involved in Crime No. 11/2026 registered at Police Station- E.O.W. / Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 12 of Prevention of Corruption 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 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 sufÏcient 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, 5 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 sufÏcient 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. OfÏce is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Kunal