1 CGHC010262102026 2026:CGHC:29960 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C(A) No.1109 of 2026 Bhupendra Singh S/o Indrajit Singh Aged About 57 Years Occupation Suspended Assistant Accountant, District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. (Maryadit) Ambikapur, Distt. Sarguja, R/o Kanya Parisar Road, Vishnupur, Ambikapur, Distt. Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Sitapur, Distt. Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Neeraj Kumar Mehta, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 15.07.2026 1. The Applicant has preferred this anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.07.16 11:07:54 +0530 2 arrest in connection with Crime No.188/2026, registered at Police Station – Sitapur, District Surguja (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 318, 316(5), 61(2) and 3(5) of BNS. 2. As per the prosecution case, pursuant to an inquiry conducted on the directions of the Collector, Surguja, a written complaint dated 27.05.2026 was lodged by Anand Singh, In-charge Chief Accountant, District Cooperative Central Bank, Ambikapur. On the basis of the said complaint, a Crime was registered against the present Applicant along with other co-accused. It is alleged that while posted as employees/officers of the District Cooperative Central Bank, Petla Branch, the accused persons, in conspiracy with each other, forged the signatures of 127 farmers, fraudulently sanctioned loans in their names and misappropriated a sum of Rs.1,92,82,096/-. The present Applicant, who was working as an Assistant Accountant, is alleged to have been involved in processing the said fictitious loans along with other bank officials. During investigation, statements of the concerned farmers were recorded, wherein they allegedly denied having any knowledge of the loans sanctioned in their names. On the basis of the said complaint, offences mentioned above, were 3 registered against the Applicant and other accused persons. 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 further submitted that though the bail application of co-accused has been rejected by this Court, the present case stands on a different footing as the amount in question has already been deposited. It is contended that the co-accused was denied bail primarily on account of the seriousness of allegations and the stage of investigation, whereas the present Applicant deserves consideration in view of the subsequent developments and the facts of his individual case and prays for grant of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the application and submits that though there are no previous criminal antecedents against the present Applicant, the bail application of the co-accused has already been rejected by this Court considering the nature of allegations and the material available on record. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 4 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations, the fact that the Applicant is alleged to have been involved in sanctioning fraudulent loans in the names of 127 farmers causing an alleged loss of Rs.1,92,82,096/- to the Bank and the fact that the bail application of co-accused has already been rejected by this Court, this Court is not inclined to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail to the Applicant. 7. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail application of the Applicant – Bhupendra Singh, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with Crime No.188/2026, registered at Police Station – Sitapur, District Surguja (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 318, 316(5), 61(2) and 3(5) of BNS, is hereby rejected. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Priya