1 CGHC010322932026 2026:CGHC:37144 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No.7686 of 2026 Sumit Singh, S/o- Achal Singh Aged About 24 Years Caste Rajput (Thakur), R/o- Village- Gdhaich, Dhaulpur, Vintipura, P.S. Maniya, District- Vintipura (Rajasthan) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (SHO), Police Station Balrampur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ...Non-applicant _____________________________________________________ For Applicant :Mr. Shikhar Agnihotri, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Mr. SS Baghel, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 19.08.2026 1. The Applicant has preferred this 1st Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.08.20 11:13:02 +0530 2 connection with Crime No.78/2026 registered at Police Station – Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 318(2), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)(a) of BNS as also under Sections 66(c) & 66(d) of IT Act. 2. Case of the prosecution is that on the basis of a complaint dated 28.04.2026 submitted by the Tahsildar, Balrampur, a report was lodged at Police Station Balrampur against the Applicant alleging that he had been continuously using forged documents to manipulate Government records. It is alleged that the Applicant had earlier submitted an application for issuance of a domicile certificate dated 05.07.2023, which, upon verification, was found incomplete/defective and was rejected/returned. Thereafter, a verification report was sent to the Commandant, 204 Cobra Battalion, CRPF, regarding a purported domicile certificate dated 20.07.2023, which was found not to have been issued by the concerned office. Subsequently, it is alleged that the Applicant again committed forgery and on 13.02.2026, unauthorisedly obtained a domicile certificate through Application No. 070701260000956 using the e-District ID of the Tahsildar, Balrampur. Upon verification, it was found that the documents annexed with the application had been prepared 3 by tampering with and forging the documents of Vishal Soni, son of Suresh Soni, resident of Ward No.5, Balrampur. The Patwari's verification report further revealed that the Patwari report, Aadhaar Card, mark-sheet and B-1 document submitted by the Applicant were forged. It is thus alleged that the Applicant committed forgery and fraud in Government records and unauthorisedly accessed and misused the Government portal. Based on these allegations, the offences as mentioned above have been registered against the present Applicant. Hence this application.` 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 as per the charge-sheet, the forged domicile certificate was prepared and procured by the other co-accused, who allegedly obtained and supplied the same to the Applicant by using documents belonging to another person namely Vishal Soni and that there is no material to show that the Applicant had prepared the forged documents or participated in the process of obtaining or issuing the said certificate. It is further submitted that the Applicant received the certificate under the bona fide belief that it was genuine and was himself cheated by the co-accused, who had allegedly lured him with the promise of securing employment, 4 taken money from him and arranged the forged documents. He lastly submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed, the relevant documents have been seized, the Applicant has been removed from service and has remained in custody since 14.05.2026 and the trial is likely to take quite some time for its conclusion, therefore, he may be granted bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the material available in the case diary, the nature of the allegations, the fact that the relevant documents have been seized, the Applicant is in custody since 14.05.2026 and has already been removed from service, the absence of any prima facie material showing his direct involvement in the preparation or issuance of the forged domicile certificate and the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, without commenting anything further on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let Applicant- Sumit Singh involved in Crime No. 78/2026 5 registered at Police Station – Balrampur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 318(2), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)(a) of BNS as also under Sections 66(c) & 66(d) of IT Act be released on bail on his furnishing a 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/she 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/her counsel. In case of his/her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her 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/her 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/her, 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 6 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/her 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 Priya