1 CGHC010257472026 2026:CGHC:29343 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C(A) No.1061 of 2026 Bharti Soni W/o Shantanu Soni Aged About 34 Years R/o Near Aset House Saddu, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Vidhansabha, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Swapnil Keshari, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.07.2026 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the Applicant who is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.121/2026 registered at Police Station – Vidhansabha, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offences SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.07.14 10:49:03 +0530 2 punishable under Sections 316(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 61(2) of BNS, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, a written complaint was lodged by the Deputy General Manager of M/s Mosh Varya Infrastructure Limited alleging that the co-accused Manish Vishwas, while working as Senior Manager (HR) in the company, misused his position and prepared forged salary documents in the names of former employees who had already left the company. It is alleged that, in connivance with other persons, he transferred company funds into his own account and the bank accounts of his relatives and associates, thereby causing an alleged loss of approximately Rs.3,38,34,846/- to the company during the period from 01.04.2021 to 29.03.2026. The allegation against the present Applicant is that she had received certain amounts through her bank account from the company during the said period. Accordingly, she has been implicated in the alleged commission of the offences. Hence, this application. 3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the main allegation is against co- accused Manish Vishwas, who is alleged to have prepared forged salary documents and transferred the company funds, 3 whereas the only allegation against the present Applicant is that certain amounts were transferred from the company account to her bank account. He further submits that even if the allegations made in the FIR are taken at their face value, there is no allegation that the present Applicant had any role in withdrawal or misappropriation of the company funds. It is further submitted that other co-accused persons namely Varsha Andani and Vandana Chaudhari, against whom similar allegations have been levelled, have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 29.06.2026 passed in MCRC (A) No.937/2026 and dated 13.05.2026 passed in MCRC (A) No.742/2026 respectively. He further submits that the Applicant is a lady having a child to look after and she has already returned the amount received by her to the company, therefore, considering the principle of parity and the facts and circumstances of the case, the Applicant may be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the Applicant. 5. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations, the fact that the main allegation is against co-accused Manish Vishwas, who is alleged to have prepared forged salary documents and 4 transferred the company funds, whereas the allegation against the present Applicant is only with regard to receipt of certain amounts in her bank account, the fact that there is no specific allegation that the Applicant played any role in withdrawal or misappropriation of the alleged amount, the fact that other co-accused persons namely Varsha Andani and Vandana Chaudhari, against whom similar allegations have been levelled, have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 29.06.2026 passed in MCRC (A) No. 937/2026 and dated 13.05.2026 passed in MCRC (A) No. 742/2026 respectively, the fact that the Applicant is a lady having a child to look after and she has already returned the amount received by her to the company, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail to the Applicant. 6. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the Applicant – Bharti Soni, on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, she shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The Applicant/s shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as 5 to dissuade him/her/them from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The Applicant/s shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicant/s shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him/her/them by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d)The Applicant/s and the surety shall submit a copy of his/her/their adhaar card along with a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicant/s shall not involve himself/herself/themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Priya