1 CGHC010242552026 2026:CGHC:33244 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5839 of 2026 Yashwant Kumar Verma @ Raju Verma S/o Devlal Verma Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Khairi, Tehsil Dongargarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Outpost Moharra, P.S. Dongargarh, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 31.07.2026 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. 268/2026 registered at Outpost – Moharra, Police Station- Dongargarh, District - Rajnandgaon, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the applicant, along with other co-accused persons, is alleged to have misappropriated and sold 995.68 quintals of paddy belonging to the concerned cooperative society with the intention of obtaining wrongful gain, thereby RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 causing a loss of approximately Rs. 30,86,608/- to the society and the Government exchequer. It is further alleged that the applicant falsely showed excess dryness/shrinkage in the paddy stock and, on that basis, facilitated its unauthorized disposal. On the basis of the said allegations, the present crime has been registered against the applicant and he has been implicated for the offences alleged therein. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the matter. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. It is submitted that the applicant is the registered owner of vehicle bearing registration No. CG-04-OL-1049 and is engaged in the business of providing vehicles on hire. The said vehicle was allegedly hired by the Manager of the concerned Society, namely Santosh Kumar, who informed the applicant that paddy was required to be transported from Moharra Society to another society. Acting bona fide and in the ordinary course of business, the applicant merely provided his vehicle and deputed his driver, Sundar Lal Sahu, for the transportation work. It is further submitted that the applicant had neither possession nor custody of the paddy in question and was not entrusted with any stock belonging to the Society. The applicant had no access to or control over the Society premises, records, or keys, and the loading, unloading, and transportation of the paddy were carried out by the driver strictly under the instructions and supervision of the concerned Society officials and other co-accused persons. The applicant had no 3 knowledge whatsoever regarding any alleged irregularity or illegal activity committed by the co-accused persons and was not a beneficiary of any alleged misappropriation. It is also submitted that the applicant is a farmer by occupation and owns approximately 8 acres of agricultural land where he cultivates paddy. The paddy seized from the applicant’s house is his own agricultural produce and has no connection whatsoever with the paddy alleged to have been misappropriated by the co-accused persons. Thus, no overt act has been attributed to the applicant, and his implication in the present case is wholly unjustified. He further submits that similarly situated co-accused persons namely, Santosh Kumar Verma and Vedprakash Sahu have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Hon’ble Court vide orders dated 20.07.2026 and 08.07.2026 in MCRCA Nos. 1127/2026 and 1047/2026 respectively. He also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 18.05.2026, the 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 on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, the fact that though the allegations against the applicant are that he, being the owner of vehicle bearing registration No. CG-04-OL-1049, facilitated the transportation of the alleged misappropriated paddy and thereby assisted the co- accused persons in causing wrongful loss to the Society and the Government exchequer, but it is also to be noted that the other co- accused persons namely, Santosh Kumar Verma and Vedprakash Sahu have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 20.07.2026 and 08.07.2026 in MCRCA Nos. 1127/2026 and 1047/2026 respectively, and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused persons, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, the present applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and he is jail since 18.05.2026, the conclusion of the trial will take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Yashwant Kumar Verma @ Raju Verma, involved in Crime No. 268/2026 registered at Outpost – Moharra, Police Station- Dongargarh, District - Rajnandgaon, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 5 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 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan