1 CGHC010298442026 2026:CGHC:34503 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7052 of 2026 1 - Chandra Prakash Lahare S/o Bhagirathi Lahare Aged About 37 Years R/o Agardhar, P.S. Baloda, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) 2 - Lalai Ram Maravi S/o Madho Ram Maravi Aged About 37 Years R/o Mahuli, P.S. Trikunda, District- Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.) 3 - Nilesh Kerketta S/o Dr. Sai Kerket Aged About 31 Years R/o Thakurnagar Jogi, P.S. Kapu, District- Raigarh (C.G.) 4 - Lokesh Toppo S/o Late Tiharu Ram Toppo Aged About 28 Years R/o Junwani P.S. Chakradharnagar, District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Manipur, District – Surguja (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Anusha Naik, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 06.08.2026 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 311/2025, registered at Police Station – Manipur, District – Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the FIR was lodged by the RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 complainant in which she has alleged that the jail officials, including the applicants had received illegal money from inmates through online transactions. Based on these allegations, the Department directed Police Station Manipur to lodge the FIR against the applicants, pursuant to which the crime was registered, and the applicant No.1, 2 and 3 have received Rs. 5,000/- and applicant No.4 has received Rs. 30,000/-. Hence, this application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case and there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicants. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicants are in jail since 22.05.2026 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that the jail officials, including the applicants had received illegal money from inmates through online transactions, and the applicant No.1, 2 and 3 have received Rs. 5,000/- and applicant No.4 has received Rs. 30,000/-, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present 3 applicants, the charge-sheet has been filed in this case, the applicants are in jail since 22.05.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicants – Chandra Prakash Lahare, Lalai Ram Maravi, Nilesh Kerketta and Lokesh Toppo, involved in Crime No. 311/2025, registered at Police Station – Manipur, District – Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, be released on bail on their 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 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 4 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 Rajshekhar