1 2026:CGHC:27238 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 996 of 2026 1 - Rahul Choudhary S/o Gajanand Choudhary Aged About 38 Years R/o Gosai Tola, Tehsil- Aamgaon, District- Gondiya (Maharashtra) 2 - Gangaprasad Sihore S/o Chetan Sihore Aged About 32 Years R/o Pangaon, Tehsil- Salekasa, District- Gondiya (Maharastra) 3 - Pramod Tumsare S/o Karuji Tumsare Aged About 38 Years R/o Saklitola, Tehsil- Salekasa, District- Gondiya (Maharastra) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Chhuriya, District- Rajnandgaon, (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe Senior Advocate along with Mr. Kabeer Kalwani, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02.07.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.14/2026 VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.03 12:52:47 +0530 2 registered at Police Station – Chhuriya, District - Rajnandgaon, (C.G.) for the offences punishable Under Section 3(2)(च)(क), 3(2)(च)(ख), 3(2) (ज), 3(2)(डा), 3(3)(क)(1)(2), 3(3)(क)(i)(ii), 3(3)(ख)(क), 3(4)(ख), 7(1)(क)(i) (ii), 3(2)(ज)(झ) & 7(1)(ग) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, the report was lodged against 10 persons for an offence under Sections 3 & 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 with an averment that, illegal transportation and hoarding of paddy was being done from other States to the committees of Chhattisgarh for consumption and as per the orders of Collector, the investigation and checking was done by the authorities and during the checking of trucks coming from inter-state via NH.53, the Trucks bearing registration no. MH14 HU 4811, MH15 GV 4376, MH35 AJ 3499, MH35 AJ 4828, MH40 CD 7246, MH40 CD 9204 was found with illegal transportation and hoarding of paddy amounting Rs. 1,46,90,800/-. The said paddy was seized by the authorities and prima facie, offence under Section 3 & 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 was found to have been committed and pursuant thereto, aforesaid offences were registered against the accused persons including the applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicants are merely drivers of the trucks in question and were only discharging their duties in the course of their employment. They had no knowledge of the prohibition imposed by the State of Chhattisgarh regarding transportation of paddy and no specific overt act has been attributed to them. It is further submitted that no 3 material has been collected during investigation to establish that the seized paddy was being transported for sale at any paddy procurement centre in the State of Chhattisgarh and that there is no prohibition on the sale and purchase of paddy in the open market. The prosecution case is based merely on an apprehension that the paddy was intended to be disposed of at the procurement centres. Learned counsel further submits that the paddy as well as the vehicles have already been seized and subsequently released pursuant to the order passed by the Collector, Rajnandgaon, after imposition and deposit of the requisite penalty and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by arresting the applicants. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the investigation is substantially complete. 4. Learned counsel further submits that the bail application of co-accused Vishnu Agrawal was rejected by this Court in MCRCA No. 192 of 2026 vide order dated 13.02.2026, however, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Special Leave to Appeal No. 4903 of 2026, vide order dated 23.03.2026, granted him anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that similarly situated co-accused, namely, Neeraj Sapekar, Krishna Kumar Dongarwar and Arun Damahe, who were also drivers, have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. Since the case of the present applicants stands on an identical footing and no specific role has been attributed to them, they are entitled to the benefit of parity. It is lastly submitted that the applicants are permanent residents of District Gondia, Maharashtra, have no likelihood of absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation, and shall abide by any condition that may be imposed 4 by this Court. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicants be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the anticipatory bail application of the applicants. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the allegations, and the material available on record, this Court finds that the bail application of co-accused Vishnu Agrawal was rejected by this Court in MCRCA No. 192 of 2026 vide order dated 13.02.2026, however, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Special Leave to Appeal No. 4903 of 2026, vide order dated 23.03.2026, granted him anticipatory bail. It is further evident that similarly situated co-accused, namely, Neeraj Sapekar, Krishna Kumar Dongarwar and Arun Damahe, who were also drivers, have already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 2509 of 2026. The present applicants are also drivers and no distinguishing feature has been pointed out to differentiate their case from that of the aforesaid co-accused. Thus, the case of the present applicants stands on the same footing as that of the co- accused who have already been granted the benefit of bail. Therefore, on the ground of parity and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicants. 8. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants – Rahul Choudhary, Gangaprasad 5 Sihore & Pramod Tumsare, on executing a personal bond and one local surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) they 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) they shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) they 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 applicants 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) he shall not involve themself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav