1 2026:CGHC:9082 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1812 of 2026 Sudesh Yadav S/o Bhuneshwar Yadav Aged About 30 Years Police Station- Shankargarh, R/o - District Balrampur-Ramanujganj C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Kusmi, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj C.G. ... Respondent(s) For applicant (s) : Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 20.02.2026. 1. This is the second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant Sudesh Yadav has been dismissed on merits vide order dated 26.11.2025 passed in MCRC No. 8686/2025. SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2026.02.20 18:23:42 +0530 2 The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 39/2025 registered at Police Station Kusmi, Dist- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 B, 34 of IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on the basis of letter No/ establishment/25-26/356 Ambikapur dated 26.05.2025 by Arvind Srivastava. Branch Manager, District Cooperative Bank Limited Ambikapur, a report was lodged against the accused Vikash Chand Pandvi, retired Supervisor. Ashok Kumar Soni. Assistant Chief Supervisor, Ethal Singh, Retired Committee Manager, Vijay Kumar Uike, retired Branch Manager, Samalsai, retired In-charge Branch Banager, Jagdish Prasad, suspended Assistant Accountant, Tabarak Ali, Sub-Clerk, Laxman Devangan, Institution Manager, Rajendra Prasad Pandey, suspended Co-Chief Supervisor, Sudesh Kumar Yadav, Manager, Jamdi Samiti, Prakash Kumar Singh, Computer Operator, Branch Kusmi, Rajendra Prasad, suspended Manager, that the e-mail dated 26.04.2024 of NABARD Regional Office Raipur was received regarding the bank account Numbers mentioned in the complaint letter of CEO, Janpad Panchayat Shankargarh. On receipt of complaint regarding suspicious transactions and huge financial scam in branch Shankargarh/Kusmi in 604007085677, 604007009117 and 604007013601 under branch Kusmi and Shankargarh. An investigation team was constituted to look into the irregularities in the accounts of the Samiti but the investigation team did not investigate, but the Flash Audit Report was obtained from the 3 bank's C.A. Naveen Upadhyay & Associates. It was found that as on 05.02.2025, Rs. 6,27,26,935 in Account No. 604007085677, Rs. 3,19,20,700 in Account No. 604007009117, Rs.2,41,18,614 in Account 604007013601, Rs. 16,58,000 in Account No. 104003588738, Rs. 64,13,500 in Account No. 104003641217 and Account No. 604007024067 Rs. 46, 44, 841/-thus total Rs. 13, 14, 82,590/- were found to have been committed. On the basis of the said Flash Audit Report, an investigation team was constituted in which, the investigation report was given by the investigation team that Rs. 19,22,73,908/- was transferred through 1597 financial transactions in account No. 604007085677, Rs. 91,57,000/- was transferred through 46 financial transactions in account No.104003641217 and Rs.3,19,20,700 was transferred through 138 financial transactions in account No. 604007009117 and through NEFT Rs. 40,54,000 were found to have been committed by Jamuna Anlakar through 12 financial transactions. Thus total Rs. 23,74,05,608/- financial irregularities committed in the bank branch of Shankargarh/Kusmi. Through the account No. 10400578368, Rs. 96,36,814 was found in the account of applicant as such all the accused persons have haiched a conspiracy and committed misappropriation of the funds of the Bank. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that in the present case, there is no material on record to show the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence and the applicant was never employed as a bank employee at the District Cooperative Central 4 Bank Limited, Kusmi or Shankargarh Branch. Therefore, the very foundation of the allegation that he was involved in any irregularity relating to Government funds at the Bank is misconceived and baseless. He further submits that the co-accused persons in the present case, namely Vijay Ukey, Samal Sai, Jagdish Prasad, Smt. Sushma Ekka, Aitbal Singh, Tabarak Ali, Rajendra Prasad Pandey, Laxmi Prasad Dewangan, Vikas Chandra Pandavi, Navneet Soni and Rajendra Prasad, have already been granted bail by the Hon’ble High Court vide orders dated 13.10.2025 and 07.01.2026 in MCRC Nos. 8107/2025, 7526/2025, 6797/2025, 6396/2025, 5933/2025, 5395/2025, 5353/2025, 5002/2025, 4926/2025 and 52/2026. On the ground of parity alone, the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and he would submit that charge sheet has been filed in this case. He would submit that the present applicant, along with other co-accused persons, was involved in a large-scale financial irregularity resulting in embezzlement of government funds to the tune of Rs.26.47 crores. It is contended that during investigation, substantial material has been collected showing the transfer of Rs.96,36,814/- to the applicant's bank account, and such transfer cannot be said to be without his knowledge. He would submit that bail application of co-accused namely Prakash Kumar Singh, a bank employee has been rejected by this Court in MCRC No.9105/2025 on 13/11/2025 in whose bank account amount of Rs.46,44,841/- has 5 been transferred, hence, the second bail application of the present applicant is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. It is noted that the principal contention advanced on behalf of the applicant is that other co-accused persons in the present case have already been granted bail and, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. However, it is equally pertinent to note that the bail application of a co-accused, namely Prakash Kumar Singh, who was a bank employee, has been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 9105/2025 vide order dated 13/11/2025, in whose bank account an amount of Rs. 46,44,841/- had been transferred. The material available on record indicates that a substantial amount is alleged to have been transferred to the account of the present applicant as well, thereby disclosing prima facie involvement. 7. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the magnitude of the alleged embezzlement of public funds, and the material collected during investigation, this Court is of the view that the case of the present applicant stands on a similar footing to that of the co- accused whose bail has been rejected. Therefore, at this stage, the applicant is not entitled to the benefit of parity. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant Sudesh Yadav in connection with Crime No. 39/2025 registered at P.S. 6 Kusmi, Dist- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (CG) for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34 of IPC is rejected. 9. Considering that the present applicant has been in judicial custody since 27.05.2025, the learned Trial Court is directed to make all endeavours to expedite the trial and conclude the proceedings as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order, in accordance with law.” 10. 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 Sagrika