1 CGHC010270852026 2026:CGHC:31467 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6638 of 2026 Jitendra Bhave S/o Late Hori Lal Bhave Aged About 38 Years R/o Village- Siladehi, Police Station- Birra, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Out Post- Korbi, Police Station- Pasan, District- Korba (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Chandrikaditya Pandey, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 23.07.2026 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. 181/2025 registered at Out Post- Korbi, Police Station- Pasan, District- Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a written complaint dated 18.09.2025 was lodged by Smt. Suman Das Manikpuri, Naib RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Tehsildar, Podi-Uproda, at Police Outpost Korbi pursuant to an enquiry conducted in compliance with the order dated 17.09.2025 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Podi-Uproda. It was alleged that co-accused Shivcharan Kaushal had fraudulently caused Government land situated at Village Lalpur, Patwari Halka No. 20, Revenue Inspector Circle Korbi, bearing Khasra Nos. 89/82, 89/83, 89/84 and 89/85, admeasuring 9.0340 hectares, to be recorded in his name by manipulating and fabricating revenue records and thereafter obtained a loan of Rs.20,00,000/- from Axis Bank, Durg Branch by mortgaging the said land. On the basis of the complaint, a Zero FIR was initially registered at Police Outpost Korbi on 18.09.2025 and was subsequently registered as Crime No. 181/2025 at Police Station Pasan on 19.09.2025 for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338 and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. During the course of investigation, it was allegedly revealed that the present applicant, Jitendra Bhave, who was posted as Patwari of Halka No. 20, Tahsil Podi-Uproda, acted in conspiracy with co-accused Shivcharan Kaushal and, by allegedly misusing his official position and digital signature, facilitated the mutation and recording of the aforesaid Government land in the name of the co-accused. The prosecution further alleges that, on the basis of such forged and manipulated revenue entries, the co-accused obtained a Kisan Credit Card loan from Axis Bank and utilized the amount for personal gain. Upon completion of investigation against the present applicant, the police found sufficient material against him and filed a charge-sheet on 3 18.06.2026 for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, while investigation against the remaining co-accused persons was kept open for filing of a supplementary charge-sheet. Hence, the present bail 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 applicant was serving as a Patwari and has been arraigned on the basis of acts allegedly performed in the discharge of his official duties. He submits that there is no material on record to prima facie establish that the applicant acted with any dishonest intention or derived any personal benefit from the alleged mutation proceedings. It is argued that the prosecution case is primarily based upon revenue records, mutation entries and digital signatures, all of which are documentary in nature and are already in the custody of the prosecution. Therefore, there is no possibility of the applicant tampering with the evidence or influencing the course of investigation. It is further contended that the principal allegations relate to the alleged mutation of land records and, even according to the prosecution case, the main beneficiary of the alleged transaction is the co-accused Shivcharan Kaushal, who is still absconding along with other co-accused persons and against whom investigation is continuing. He submits that the applicant has been singled out for arrest while the alleged principal beneficiaries have not yet been apprehended. It is further argued that the essential ingredients of the offences alleged against the applicant 4 are not made out and that, at the highest, the allegations pertain to acts performed in an official capacity, which would be a matter for departmental proceedings rather than criminal prosecution. The applicant is in jail since 23.04.2026, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant, while posted as a Patwari, abused his official position and, in conspiracy with the co- accused persons, facilitated the illegal mutation of valuable Government land in favour of a private individual by misusing his digital signature and manipulating revenue records. It is contended that the investigation has revealed sufficient incriminating material against the applicant. He further submits that the offence involves fraudulent conversion of Government land and wrongful gain to the accused persons, causing loss to the State exchequer. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, the applicant’s active role in the commission of the offence, and the prima facie material available on record, she prays that the applicant is not entitled for 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, nature and gravity of offence, and the fact that though the allegation against the applicant is that, while serving as a Patwari, he allegedly 5 misused his digital signature and manipulated revenue records to facilitate the illegal mutation of Government land in favour of co- accused Shivcharan Kaushal, thereby enabling the latter to obtain a loan of Rs. 20 lakh by mortgaging the said land, but considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case and he is in jail since 23.04.2026, and the final conclusion of trial is likely to take some considerable time, therefore, without commenting anything on merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant- Jitendra Bhave, involved in Crime No. 181/2025 registered at Out Post- Korbi, Police Station- Pasan, District- Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 3(5) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 6 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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 him, 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 him in accordance with law. 8. 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 Rahul Dewangan