1 2026:CGHC:23005 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C No.4570 of 2026 Abhishek Kaushal S/o Vipan Kumar Kaushal Aged About 41 Years R/o 178e, Block Bollywood Heights 2, Peer Muchalla, SAS Nagar, Punjab. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Additional Superintendent Of Police Economic Offence Wing / Anti Corruption Bureau, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant _____________________________________________________ For Applicant :Mr. Amit Kumar Saini along with Mr. Topilal Bareth, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. G.A Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 14.05.2026 1. The Applicant has preferred this 1st Bail Application under SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.05.15 13:49:08 +0530 2 Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.05/2025 registered at Police Station – ACB/EOW, Raipur (C.G.), for the offence under Sections 13(1)a r/w Sections 13(2),7(c) of PC Act, under Sections 409 and 120-B IPC and under Sections 467, 468 and 471 of IPC (added later on). 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that officials of the Directorate of Health Services and Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Limited (CGMSC), in conspiracy with private suppliers including Mokshit Corporation, allegedly procured reagents, medical equipment and consumables worth about Rs.411 crores without proper assessment of requirement, administrative approval, budget sanction and adherence to the prescribed procedure. It is alleged that the accused persons manipulated tender conditions to favour selected companies, issued purchase orders in undue haste, procured materials at inflated rates and supplied reagents to institutions lacking necessary infrastructure, thereby causing huge financial loss to the State exchequer and extending undue pecuniary benefit to private firms. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present offences came to be registered against the present Applicant. Hence this 3 application. 3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and is in custody since 18.01.2026. It is submitted that though the Applicant was named in the FIR, his name was not reflected in the charge-sheet initially filed and he was arrested only after appearance pursuant to summons issued by the Court, whereafter supplementary charge-sheet was filed against him on 16.02.2026. It is further submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has granted regular bail to co- accused Shashank Chopra and Kamalkant Patanwar in SLP (Crl.) No.3295/2026 and SLP (Crl.) No.5375/2026 vide order dated 17.04.2026, co-accused Shubham Barmecha has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 12.05.2026 passed in M.Cr.C.(A) No.723/2026 and co- accused Dr. Anil Parsai has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 12.05.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.3074/2026. It is lastly submitted that conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time and therefore, the Applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and does not dispute the fact that the said co- accused have been granted bail. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations, the pre-trial detention, charge sheet has been filed and that Hon’ble Supreme Court has granted regular bail to co-accused Shashank Chopra and Kamalkant Patanwar in SLP (Crl.) No.3295/2026 and SLP (Crl.) No.5375/2026 vide order dated 17.04.2026, co-accused Shubham Barmecha has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 12.05.2026 passed in M.Cr.C.(A) No.723/2026 and co- accused Dr. Anil Parsai has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 12.05.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.3074/2026 and also considering the likelihood of the trial taking considerable time, without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 7. Let applicant- Abhishek Kaushal involved in Crime No.05/2025 registered at Police Station – ACB/EOW, Raipur (C.G.), for the offence under Sections 13(1)a r/w Sections 13(2),7(c) of PC Act, under Sections 409 and 120-B IPC and under Sections 467, 468 and 471 of IPC (added later on) be 5 released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with local 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. (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. 6 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 Priya