1 CGHC010259722026 2026:CGHC:32712 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1115 of 2026 Vikas Kshatriya S/o- Ashok Hariharno Aged About 44 Years Address- A1, Jaiswal Bhavan, Khajri Road, Bilaigarh, District- Saranggarh- Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh, Permanent Address- Flat No. 67, Block 5 Dalip Parisar, Kailash Nagar, Near Housing Board, I E Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Sarsiwa, District- Saranggarh- Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rishabh Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.07.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.390/2025 registered at Police Station - Sarsiwa, District- Saranggarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 318(2), 336(3), 336(4), 338, 340(2), 341(1), 341(2) & 3(5) of the BNS. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.30 12:18:48 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the present applicant, while serving as the Branch Manager of HDFC Bank, Bilaigarh Branch, initially lodged a written complaint on 03.12.2025 alleging that accused Ritu Sahu and her associates had used forged documents, including a fabricated seal and forged signature of the Station House Officer, Police Station Sarsiwa, to fraudulently remove the hold marked on HDFC Bank Account No. 50100706501332 and illegally withdraw an amount of Rs. 21,08,772/-. On the basis of the complaint, investigation was undertaken during which the police seized, inter alia, a blank/irregular application form, original Cheque No. 000005 dated 05.07.2025 for Rs. 9,00,000/-, e-KYC documents and bank account statements reflecting several transactions made between 05.07.2025 and 16.07.2025. The memoranda of accused Ritu Sahu and Chandrahas Sahu were recorded and videographed, and several accused persons, namely, Ritu Sahu, Chandrahas Sahu, Tikaram Sahu, Hanumant Rao Tandon, Pramod Dewangan, Gajendra Nath Sahu and Deepak @ Dinesh Sahu, were arrested for offences relating to conspiracy, cheating, criminal breach of trust, forgery and allied offences, while some other accused persons remained absconding. During the course of investigation, the prosecution alleged that the present applicant, along with certain officials of HDFC Bank, knowingly concealed the commission of the offence, furnished false information and colluded with the principal accused in facilitating the removal of the hold on the account and the subsequent withdrawal of the amount. On the basis of the material collected during investigation, the applicant was also implicated in the alleged offences, and after completion of the investigation, Charge-sheet filed. 3 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 investigation has already been concluded and the charge-sheet has been filed; therefore, the custodial detention of the applicant is no longer required. It is further submitted that the entire investigation is vitiated for want of jurisdiction, as the alleged place of occurrence falls within the territorial limits of Police Station Bilaigarh, whereas the investigation has been conducted by Police Station Sarsiwa, which itself is an interested party in the matter. Learned counsel further submits that the recommendation made by the Deputy Collector for the applicant's arrest and the proceedings initiated by the Additional Collector are wholly without jurisdiction and beyond the powers conferred under the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. It is also contended that the order recommending registration of the FIR was passed without affording the applicant any opportunity of hearing and is, therefore, illegal. Learned counsel further argues that the applicant has been implicated due to political and administrative pressure with an intention to shield the actual culprits, namely, Shiva Sahu and Ritu Sahu. It is submitted that the applicant is an employee of HDFC Bank, Sarangarh Branch, has no criminal antecedents, and had merely furnished bank statements and other documents in compliance with lawful requisitions issued by the investigating authorities while extending full cooperation throughout the inquiry. It is further submitted that the allegations of forgery and other offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita are directed against the principal accused and have no nexus with the applicant, who neither participated in the alleged acts 4 nor derived any pecuniary or other benefit therefrom. Learned counsel submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated despite his bona fide conduct and that the arrest of the bank employees was effected under undue political and administrative pressure. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident, the sole breadwinner of his family, has deep roots in society, is not likely to abscond or tamper with the prosecution evidence, and undertakes to cooperate with the trial and abide by all such terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court. On these grounds, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposed the anticipatory bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. 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, and further taking into consideration that similarly situated co-accused, namely, Hanumantrav Tandon, Raj and Jitendra Kumar Sahu, have already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC Nos. 3569/2026 and 796/2026 vide orders dated 15.06.2026 and 30.06.2026, respectively, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 5 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Vikas Kshatriya, on executing a personal bond and one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he 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) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he 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 applicant 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 himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav