1 2026:CGHC:21444 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 683 of 2026 • Sushil Agrawal S/o Vishnu Prasad Agrawal Aged About 48 Years R/o -27- B, State Bank Colony Mohaba Bazar Tatibandh, Raipur District -Raipur C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Eow/acb, Raipur District Raipur C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sunil Otwani, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Chandra Gupta, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 07/05/2026 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.29/2012 registered at Police Station – A.C.B./EOW, District: Raipur, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 13(2) read with Section 3(1)(c) & (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120(B), 409, 420, of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the present application under VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.05.08 20:16:30 +0530 2 Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as "BNSS") has been preferred for the grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant, who apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 29/2012 registered at Police Station EOW/ACB Raipur for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 409, 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 13(1) (d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The crux of the matter lies in a transaction dated 10.03.2011, wherein the applicant's family purchased a residential plot from the NMDC Employees Co-operative Housing Society through a registered Sale Deed executed by a government-appointed Liquidator. The prosecution alleges that the Liquidator, acting in conspiracy with various allottees, re-allotted plots at rates lower than the prevailing collector rates. However, the applicant's relative (paternal aunt) is a bona fide purchaser who relied on the apparent authority of a statutory official. The investigation has remained dormant for 14 years. It is only following the arrest of the prime and sole administrative accused, the statutory Liquidator, Shri Raj Kumar Naidu, on 06.04.2026, that the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) has suddenly sought the applicant's interrogation. Immediately following the sole accused being sent to judicial custody, a Notice of Appearance dated 10.04.2026 was served upon the applicant by the EOW under Section 160 of the CrPC (Section 179 of the BNSS) for witness attendance and Section 91 of the CrPC (Section 94 of the BNSS) for the production of documents, the copy of which is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE A/3, requiring his mandatory appearance. The applicant's apprehension of arrest is evidenced by the complainant's proactive stance during the proceedings before the Learned Special Judge, Raipur. The complainant appeared and filed a 3 formal objection against the grant of bail. The copy of objection filed by the complainant is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE A/4. This direct intervention and aggressive opposition, after fourteen years of investigative silence, creates a well-founded fear that the complainant is exerting undue influence to the applicant's incarceration. Ensure Furthermore, the civil title of the plot is already being adjudicated in a First Appeal before this Hon'ble Court, rendering the current criminal proceedings a pre-emptive strike on civil liberties. The Learned Special Judge, Raipur, failed to appreciate these nuances and dismissed the bail application on 24.04.2026, necessitating this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further contended that initial case was registered in the year 2012, but notice has been issued by the Investigating Officer to the applicant on 10.04.2026 for the purpose of Investigation and since then the applicant is apprehending for his arrest. He further submits that 30 sales deeds were executed by the Official Liquidators against one of the sale deed which was executed a civil suit was filed by the Aunt of the applicant for it’s cancellation and the said suit was dismissed and against which First Appeal before this Hon’ble Court in bearing F.A. No.224 of 2019 (Smt. Satyabhama Agrawal Vs. Ishwar Keram). Copy of the order sheet of the said appeal is annexed herewith as Annexure – A/7. He further submits that applicant has some criminal antecedent, and details of the same are mentioned in the bail application at paragraph No.4(A) and all cases are old one, therefore, he submits that the present applicant is also entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 4 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the non - applicant/State, opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant and submits that applicant has some criminal antecedent, and details of the same are mentioned in the bail application at paragraph No.4(A). 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel for the parties, also considering the case was initially registered in the year 2012 and the notice for investigation was issued to the applicant only on 10.04.2026, coupled with the fact that the dispute appears to have civil overtones arising out of execution of sale deeds by the Official Liquidators, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the applicant is not presently warranted. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application for anticipatory bail deserves to be allowed. therefore, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Sushil Agrawal, on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, 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. 5 (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 their 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 Vaishali