1 CGHC010277772026 2026:CGHC:32652 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1207 of 2026 1 - Chanakya Kumar Sahu S/o Shatrughan Lal Sahu Aged About 49 Years R/o Bajrang Chowk Borsi, Ward No. 52, Tahsil And District- Durg (C.G.) 2 - Santosh Thakre S/o Late Bhaiyalal Thakre Aged About 41 Years R/o House No. 4/57, Shivaji Nagar, Ward No. 21, Tahsil And District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Padmanabhpur, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Shri A.C. Sahu, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Miss Palak Dwivedi, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 29/07/2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.07.30 19:45:54 +0530 2 applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.398/2026 registered at Police Station – Padmanabhpur, District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318 (4), 316 (4) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the present applicants were working as employees in M/s Swastik Industrial Aid, a proprietary concern of late Rajendra Kumar Shrivastava. Applicant No.1 was employed in the Sales and Marketing Department, whereas Applicant No.2 was serving as the Accountant. The applicants have been in continuous service of the said establishment for nearly 30 years and, during their entire tenure, no complaint of any nature was ever made against them. It is the case of the prosecution that late Rajendra Kumar Shrivastava expired on 08.04.2026. Thereafter, complainant, Mrs. Savita Shrivastava, lodged a written complaint alleging that the applicants, by misusing the name of the deceased proprietor, obtained a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- in cash from one Pradeep Jain, Proprietor of M/s Tarachand Ramesh Kumar, on 03.04.2026, purportedly for the medical treatment of late Rajendra Kumar Shrivastava. It is further alleged that on 08.04.2026, the applicants again obtained a sum of Rs.3,22,000/- in cash from the said Pradeep Jain in the name of the deceased proprietor and thereafter neither informed the family members nor deposited the alleged amount with the company. It is alleged that the applicants dishonestly retained the 3 said amount of Rs.6,22,000/- and thereafter stopped attending their duties. On the basis of aforesaid allegations, after about two and a half months from the alleged occurrence, the complainant lodged the impugned FIR on 27.06.2026, Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the prosecution has been initiated only with a view to pressurize and harass the applicants, who have rendered approximately 30 years of uninterrupted and blemish-free service in M/s Swastik Industrial Aid. During the entire period of their employment, no allegation or complaint of any kind was ever made against either of the applicants. After the demise of late Rajendra Kumar Shrivastava on 08.04.2026, disputes arose amongst his family members regarding the management and control of the business. In the course of such disputes, the complainant and her husband started compelling the old employees, including the present applicants, to leave their employment. The applicants were also deprived of their lawful salary for the preceding two to three months as well as other service benefits, including amounts payable towards Provident Fund and other statutory dues. Since the applicants demanded their legitimate dues and declined to resign from service, the present false and motivated FIR has been lodged as a counterblast. The entire prosecution story is inherently 4 improbable. The applicants have never received any amount from Pradeep Jain nor have they misappropriated any amount belonging to the complainant or the company. The allegation that the applicants received Rs.6,22,000/- in cash is wholly false and unsupported by any independent material. The banking transactions of the complainant's firm clearly demonstrate regular financial dealings between M/s Swastik Industrial Aid and M/s Tarachand Ramesh Kumar. The bank statements of the firm do not disclose any outstanding liability corresponding to the alleged cash transaction of Rs.6,22,000/-. The FIR has been lodged after an unexplained delay of about two and a half months from the alleged occurrence. Such inordinate delay, without any satisfactory explanation, casts a serious doubt upon the genuineness of the prosecution case and indicates that the allegations have been made after due deliberation and as an afterthought. The entire prosecution case is based upon bald and unsubstantiated allegations. Except the interested version of the complainant and the alleged statement of Pradeep Jain, there is no independent material to show that the applicants had ever received or misappropriated the alleged amount. The applicants have been serving in M/s Swastik Industrial Aid for about 30 years with complete honesty and dedication. During entire service tenure, no complaint or allegation of any nature has ever been made against them. Their long and unblemished service itself no dishonest demonstrates that they had intention. The allegations 5 made in the FIR arise out of internal disputes which surfaced after the demise of late Rajendra Kumar Shrivastava. The applicants, being old employees of the company, have unnecessarily been dragged into the present criminal case due to the dispute relating to the management of the company. The applicants have never received any amount from Pradeep Jain as alleged in the FIR. The allegation regarding payment of Rs.6,22,000/- in cash is false, concocted and has been made only to create a criminal liability against the applicants. The alleged incident pertains to the period between 03.04.2026 and 08.04.2026, whereas the FIR came to be registered only on 27.06.2026 after an unexplained delay of about two and a half months. Such unexplained delay creates serious doubt about the truthfulness of the prosecution story. The investigation is primarily based on documentary evidence and statements of witnesses. No custodial interrogation of the applicants is necessary. The applicants are ready and willing to cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall remain available as and when required. The applicants have no criminal antecedents and no other criminal case is pending against them. Therefore the applicants may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents taken on record. 6 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, further considering the allegations levelled against the applicants and the fact that the FIR has been lodged after an unexplained delay of about two and a half months from the alleged occurrence and that the applicants do not have any criminal antecedents, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicants. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants – Chanakya Kumar Sahu & Santosh Thakre, on executing a personal bond with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) they should 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) they should not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) they should appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The Applicants and the sureties shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) they should not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Barve