1 2026:CGHC:27402 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5897 of 2026 Aniket Karsh S/o Ubari Lal Karsh Aged About 37 Years R/o MIG-1/05, Maharana Pratap Nagar, Police Station Civil Line Rampur, District Korba Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kartala, District Korba Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Kabeer Kalwani, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.07.2026 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. 62/2026 registered at Police Station – Kartala, District - Korba, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2), 338, 336(3) and 340(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, the allegation against the applicant/accused is that a written complaint was received from the Office of the Joint Director (Training), Regional Office, Industrial Training PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.07.03 17:08:35 +0530 2 Institutes, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, alleging that the applicant secured appointment to the post of Training Officer (Computer Operator and Programming Assistant) at the Government Industrial Training Institute, Kartala, by submitting forged documents. It is alleged that, for obtaining the appointment, the applicant submitted an experience certificate purportedly issued by Princeton Institute of Engineering and Technology for Women, Telangana, bearing No. PETW/EXP/23/09 dated 22.05.2023, certifying that he had worked as an Assistant Professor from 12.05.2014 to 24.01.2017. In support of the said experience, the applicant also furnished an IDBI Bank account statement pertaining to Account No. 222104000059042, purportedly reflecting salary credits during the relevant period. On the basis of the aforesaid experience certificate and bank statement, the applicant was declared eligible by the Document Verification Committee and was appointed as a Training Officer vide order dated 01.03.2024. Pursuant thereto, he joined the Government Industrial Training Institute, Kartala, Korba, on 13.03.2024 and continued in service till 13.12.2024, during which period he allegedly received approximately Rs. 5,00,000/- as salary from the Government. Subsequently, pursuant to the directions issued by the Directorate of Employment and Training for verification of the bank statements submitted by candidates claiming experience, the bank statement furnished by the applicant was verified from the concerned bank. During such verification, certain discrepancies were allegedly detected, and it was found that the entries showing salary credits between 01.01.2016 and 31.12.2016 had been falsely inserted. The prosecution alleges that the salary credits reflected for the months of January, February, March, May, July, September, October, November and December (Rs. 15,600/- each), April and August (Rs. 14,594/- each), and June (Rs. 15,097/-) were not genuine bank entries. Consequently, 3 the documents submitted by the applicant were alleged to be forged. The prosecution further alleges that the applicant knowingly used the forged experience certificate and bank statement as genuine before the recruiting authority with the dishonest intention of securing government employment and obtaining monetary benefits. On the basis of the complaint submitted by the concerned department, the present FIR was registered on 11.05.2026 for offences punishable under Sections 318(2), 338, 336(3), and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, against the applicant, and the matter was taken up for investigation. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in the offence in question. He further submits that during the investigation, the police themselves sought verification of the applicant's experience certificate from the issuing institution i.e. Princeton Institute of Engineering and Technology for Women, which, through its Principal under official seal and signature, confirmed the genuineness of the experience certificate and the service of the applicant as an Assistant Professor (COPA) from 12.05.2014 20.01.2017, and therefore, the allegations that the said certificate is a forged document collapses entirely. He also submits that during the verification process, the department even sought verification of the character and antecedents of the applicant from the Police department and the intelligence department, Telangana, Hyderabad vide order dated 20.07.2024 verified and confirmed that the applicant has no adverse record or any antecedents. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant is in custody since 11.05.2026, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, learned counsel prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel opposed the bail application 4 and submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case. She further submitted that, from a perusal of the material available on record, it transpires that the allegation against the applicant/accused, Aniket Karsh, is that he forged an experience certificate and a bank statement and, on the strength of the said forged documents, secured appointment as a Training Officer at ITI, Kartala. It is further alleged that he served in the said government post from 13.03.2024 to 13.12.2024 and received a salary of approximately Rs. 5,00,000/-. During the course of the inquiry, the applicant allegedly resigned from his service apprehending that proceedings would be initiated against him. Therefore, it is submitted that the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and the fact that the experience certificate relied upon by the applicant has been verified by the issuing institution and found to be genuine, the charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, and he is in jail since 11.05.2026, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the Applicant- Aniket Karsh, involved in Crime No. 62/2026 registered at Police Station – Kartala, District - Korba, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2), 338, 336(3) and 340(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’), be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned 5 with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, 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 her in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti