1 CGHC010325322026 2026:CGHC:37593 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7816 of 2026 1 - Shiva Sahu @ Chhotu Sahu S/o Tikaram Sahu Aged About 21 Years R/o Raikona Police Station- Sarsiwan District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Sarsiwan, District- Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) (Respondent Name Wrongly Written In Impugned Order Dated 07.08.2026 As State Government) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Deputy Advocate General Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21/08/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), seeking grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 390/2025 registered at Police Station RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 Sarsiwan, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (Chhattisgarh), for the offences punishable under Sections 318(2), 336(3), 336(4), 338, 340(2), 341(1), 341(2), 3(5), 61, 249(2) and 238(B) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, in brief, the applicant, in connivance with co-accused Ritu Sahu, is alleged to have facilitated the unfreezing of a bank account maintained with HDFC Bank, which had earlier been placed on hold in connection with a separate investigation arising out of Crime No. 131/2024. It is further alleged that, for the purpose of obtaining release of the said account and facilitating withdrawal of the amount, forged documents, including a fake seal and forged signature of the Station House Officer (SHO), Police Station Sarsiwan, were prepared and utilized. On the basis of such allegedly forged documents, an amount of approximately Rs. 21,00,000/- is alleged to have been withdrawn from the said bank account. Thereafter, a complaint was lodged against the applicant and the co-accused, pursuant to which the aforesaid offence was registered against the accused persons. 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 further submitted that, in relation to the same incident, two separate crimes, bearing Crime Nos. 389/2025 and 390/2025, have been registered at the same Police Station in respect of the alleged withdrawal of an amount of approximately Rs. 21,00,000/- from the bank account. Learned counsel further submits that the co-accused, namely Ritu Sahu, who is an accused in Crime No. 390/2025 and is alleged to have withdrawn an amount higher than that attributed to the present 3 applicant, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20.07.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 2855/2026. It is, therefore, submitted that the applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity. Learned counsel further submits that the other co-accused persons in Crime No. 390/2025 have also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 15.06.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 2415/2026; order dated 29.07.2026 passed in M.Cr.C.(A) No. 1115/2026; order dated 20.07.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 5606/2026; order dated 15.06.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 4540/2026; order dated 15.06.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 3569/2026; order dated 30.06.2026 passed in M.Cr.C.(A) No. 813/2026 and order dated 15.06.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 3698/2026. Learned counsel submits that the applicant is in custody since 03.04.2026 and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. On these grounds, learned counsel prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant has three criminal antecedents. However, learned State counsel fairly submits that the co-accused persons in the present case have already been granted bail by this Court. Considering the nature of the allegations and the criminal antecedents of the applicant, learned State counsel prays for rejection of the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the nature of the allegations, the period of incarceration undergone by the applicant since 03.04.2026 and more particularly, the fact that the co-accused, including co-accused Ritu Sahu, who is alleged to have withdrawn an amount higher than that attributed to the 4 present applicant, have already been granted bail by this Court, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity. Although the applicant has three criminal antecedents, the said circumstance, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, does not warrant a different view, particularly when the similarly placed co-accused have already been enlarged on bail. Further, the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Accordingly, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the Applicant – Shiva Sahu @ Chhotu Sahu involved in Crime No. 390/2025 registered at Police Station Sarsiwan, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (Chhattisgarh), for the offences punishable under Sections 318(2), 336(3), 336(4), 338, 340(2), 341(1), 341(2), 3(5), 61, 249(2) and 238(B) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing 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 5 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously from the receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. 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 Ruchi