1 CGHC010259642026 2026:CGHC:36861 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6205 of 2026 1 - Smt. Shafina Bano W/o Late Nisar Khan Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Mahamand Tehsil And District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The SHO, Police Station Torwa, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Prachi Singh, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Additional Advocate General Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 18/08/2026 1. The present 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. 331/2026 registered at Police Station Torwa, RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). 2. As per the prosecution case, Shri Prakash Chandra Sahu, Naib Nazir, posted in the Office of the Tahsildar, Bilaspur, submitted a written report before Police Station Torwa, District Bilaspur, alleging that the present applicant, Smt. Safina Bano, wife of Late Nisar Khan, resident of Village Mahamand, along with other persons, deliberately concealed the actual cause of death and, by adopting fraudulent means, dishonestly obtained financial assistance of ₹4,00,000/- under the Government’s Snake Bite/Poisonous Animal Bite Death Assistance Scheme, thereby causing wrongful loss to the State exchequer and corresponding wrongful gain to themselves. On the basis of the said report, a prima facie case was found to have been made out and Crime No. 331/2026 was registered at Police Station Torwa, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The matter was thereafter taken up for investigation, during the course of which the present applicant was arrested on 19.06.2026. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant has neither committed any offence nor played any role in obtaining the financial assistance in question by fraudulent means. The amount was sanctioned and disbursed by the competent Government authorities only after due scrutiny and verification of the relevant documents. Therefore, the applicant cannot be held responsible merely because the financial assistance was subsequently questioned. Learned counsel further submits that the Post-Mortem 3 Report itself records the cause of death as “snake bite”, which falls within the scope of the aforesaid scheme. There is no material on record to show that the applicant fabricated any document or practised deception at the inception of the claim. It is also submitted that, even assuming there is any dispute regarding the entitlement or eligibility for obtaining the financial assistance, the same is essentially administrative in nature and, in the absence of the essential ingredients of cheating, would not constitute an offence punishable under Section 420 of the IPC. Thus, the continued incarceration of the applicant is wholly unwarranted. Learned counsel lastly submits that the applicant is a poor lady and is working as a sweeper at Chouksey Engineering College. She is a widow who has lost her husband and has been in judicial custody since 19.06.2026. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion and, therefore, keeping the applicant in custody for an indefinite period would serve no useful purpose. Hence, the applicant deserves to be released on regular bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. It is alleged that the applicant, in connivance with other persons, concealed the actual cause of death and fraudulently obtained financial assistance of ₹4,00,000/- under the Government’s Snake Bite/Poisonous Animal Bite Death Assistance Scheme, thereby causing wrongful loss to the State exchequer. Considering the nature of the allegations and the material collected during investigation, the State opposes grant of bail to the applicant. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, the material collected during investigation, the fact that the applicant is in custody since 19.06.2026, and the fact that she has no criminal antecedents, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on regular bail. The applicant is a lady and has remained in custody for a considerable period. The allegations made against the applicant are matters which can be examined during the course of trial and continued incarceration, particularly when the trial is likely to take some time, would not serve any useful purpose. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant – Shafina Bano, involved in Crime No. 331/2026 registered at Police Station Torwa, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), be released on bail on her 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 she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for recording of evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open to the Trial Court to treat it as an abuse of the liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. 5 In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and, in order to secure her presence, a proclamation under Section 84 of the 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 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 her statement under Section 351 of the BNSS. If, in the opinion of the Trial Court, the absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, it shall be open to the Trial Court to treat such default as an abuse of the liberty of bail and proceed against her 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