1 CGHC010308762026 2026:CGHC:35232 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7345 of 2026 Manish Kumar Choudhary S/o. Late Radheshyam Choudhary Aged About 53 Years R/o. Lagzora Apartment, Mova, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Singhoda, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Arpan Verma, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Deputy A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 11.08.2026 1. This is the /rst bail application /led 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. 42/2026 registered, Police Station- Singhoda, District - Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the o:ence punishable under Sections 316(3) , 61(2), 238, 336(3), 338, 340(2), and 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 3 & 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the First Information Report in respect of the incident dated 30.03.2026 was lodged after a delay of 29 days, i.e., on 29.04.2026, at the instance of the Head Constable, Police Station Singhoda, District Mahasamund. It is alleged that Crime No. 96/2025 had earlier been registered for o:ences punishable under Sections 305(e), 287, 3(5), 221 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, in which the present applicant was not arrayed as an accused, and during investigation thereof, six LPG gas cylinders bearing registration/numbers CG07CX7254, CG07CX7244, CG07CS1663, CG07CX7472, KA01AH4318 and CG12BS4295 were seized by the police in December, 2025. It is further alleged that, considering the prevailing summer season and the absence of adequate facilities for safe storage of the seized LPG cylinders as per the prescribed standards, a letter was addressed to the Superintendent of Police, Mahasamund and the Collector, Mahasamund, and pursuant to the directions issued by the Collector, the Food Department, Mahasamund was directed to ensure that the aforesaid six LPG cylinders were kept at a secure place. In pursuance of the said direction, on 30.03.2026, the Food Inspector Avinash Dubey, Food OFcer Harish Soneshwari and Manish Yadav handed over the aforesaid six LPG cylinders on supurdnama to Thakur Petro Chemicals for their safe custody, and the said cylinders were accordingly entrusted to the said establishment. It is alleged that the cylinders contained LPG gas having an approximate value of Rs.77 lakhs and that Thakur Petro 3 Chemicals, in breach of the trust reposed upon it, misappropriated the LPG gas and thereby committed the o:ences of criminal breach of trust and cheating. It is further alleged that, pursuant to the order dated 06.04.2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, the aforesaid cylinders were subsequently released on supurdnama, out of which three cylinders were entrusted to Bhupendra Kumar Sahu, Manager of Thakur Petro Chemicals, whereas the remaining three cylinders were handed over to the Food Department. It is alleged that Bhupendra Kumar Sahu, being the power-of-attorney holder of K. Subramanyam, the owner of the accused establishment, informed the police that the valve/wall box of three LPG cylinders bearing Nos. CG07CX7245, CG07CX7244 and CG07CS1663 was found broken and, upon inspection, the said cylinders were found empty. The prosecution further alleges that Santosh Thakur, Director of Thakur Petro Chemicals, had dishonestly removed and sold the LPG gas contained in the aforesaid cylinders and that the LPG gas was sold by Santosh Kumar Thakur, thereby causing wrongful loss to the concerned department and corresponding wrongful gain to the accused persons. The copy of the FIR has been /led as Annexure A/2. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any o:ence as alleged by the prosecution. It is submitted that the applicant was neither named in the FIR nor is there any allegation or whisper against him in the entire FIR. The 4 applicant is neither the seller nor the purchaser of the LPG gas and is running his business of sale of gas stoves and home appliances in the name and style of “Sonu Traders”, Raipur, and has no concern whatsoever with the LPG gas or the cylinders in question. It is further submitted that, admittedly, all the six LPG cylinders were entrusted on supurdnama to Thakur Petro Chemicals, and the applicant has no connection with the said establishment against whom the allegation of criminal breach of trust has been levelled. Even according to the prosecution, the limited role attributed to the applicant is that of a mediator/guarantor between Thakur Petro Chemicals and the purchaser. During investigation, the police arrested Santosh Thakur and Sarthak, Directors of Thakur Petro Chemicals, Nikhil Vaishnav, Manager of Thakur Petro Chemicals, Pankaj Chandrakar, owner of Gaurav Gas Agency, Mahasamund, and Ajay Yadav, Food OFcer, Mahasamund. It is submitted that the applicant has been implicated primarily on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Pankaj Chandrakar, wherein it has been alleged that an amount of Rs.10 lakhs was paid to the applicant as a mediator; however, apart from the said memorandum statement, no independent or substantive material has been collected by the prosecution to establish payment of any such amount to the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant had old business relations with Thakur Petro Chemicals in connection with his legitimate business of gas stoves and home appliances, and an amount of Rs.30 lakhs was transferred through online banking to the account of Sonu Traders against an order for 5 supply of gas stoves. However, owing to a dispute regarding the price/rate of the gas stoves, the transaction could not be completed and the entire amount was subsequently retransferred to Thakur Petro Chemicals much prior to the registration of the present FIR. Thus, the said transaction was a bona de commercial transaction conducted through banking channels and cannot, by itself, be treated as incriminating material against the applicant. 4. Learned senior counsel further submits that even if the allegations of the prosecution are taken at their face value, the applicant has not been attributed any role in the entrustment, custody, removal, sale or misappropriation of the LPG cylinders. It is submitted that the prosecution itself alleges that Thakur Petro Chemicals was entrusted with the six LPG cylinders and that the alleged criminal breach of trust was committed by the said establishment. The applicant was neither the person to whom the cylinders were entrusted nor was he the purchaser or seller of the LPG gas. It is further submitted that the allegation that an amount of Rs.30 lakhs was transferred to the account of Sonu Traders as a security/guarantee amount in connection with the remaining three cylinders is also misconceived, as the said amount was subsequently refunded/retransferred to Thakur Petro Chemicals after the alleged transaction was completed between the concerned parties. No amount has been seized either from the applicant or from his shop. The only seizure from the applicant is of gas stoves worth approximately Rs.5,86,000/-, which are admittedly related to his regular business. It is further submitted that, even assuming that 6 the applicant acted as a mediator or guarantor, there is no material to demonstrate that he received even a single penny as commission or consideration for such alleged role. The applicant was also merely a witness to the supurdnama proceedings and such presence cannot constitute participation in the alleged o:ence. Therefore, the essential ingredients of Sections 316(3), 61(2), 238, 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act are not made out against the applicant. 5. Learned senior counsel also submits that there is a serious discrepancy regarding the alleged quantity and valuation of the LPG gas. It is submitted that Crime No. 96/2025 had already been registered in respect of the same six LPG cylinders, wherein it was alleged that the accused persons had broken the seals of the cylinders and sold the LPG gas, and the applicant was admittedly not an accused in the said case. In the said earlier case, the value of LPG gas contained in each cylinder was assessed at approximately Rs.5,50,000/-, whereas in the present FIR, the value has been substantially enhanced and the entire value of the six cylinders has been taken into consideration. Such material discrepancy creates a serious doubt regarding the prosecution version. The certi/ed copy of FIR No. 96/2025 along with the /nal report has been /led as Annexure A/3. It is further submitted that the purchasers who allegedly purchased the stolen LPG gas have not been made accused, and in their statements recorded during investigation, no allegation has been levelled against the present 7 applicant. The applicant has been in custody since 09.05.2026 and has already undergone approximately two months and twenty- seven days of incarceration. It is therefore submitted that the applicant has no role in the alleged criminal breach of trust or sale of LPG gas, there is no substantive material connecting him with the alleged o:ence except the memorandum statement of a co- accused, the alleged monetary transaction has already been reversed through banking channels, and no incriminating amount has been recovered from him. He also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been /led and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been /led before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant is directly connected with the alleged illegal transaction relating to the LPG gas contained in the cylinders entrusted to Thakur Petro Chemicals and has played an active role as a mediator/guarantor between the seller and the purchaser. It is submitted that during investigation, the statement/memorandum of co-accused Pankaj Chandrakar, owner of Gaurav Gas Agency, speci/cally discloses the involvement of the present applicant and the payment of Rs.10 lakhs to him in connection with the transaction. It is further submitted that an amount of Rs.30 lakhs was transferred to the account of Sonu Traders, of which the applicant is the proprietor, as a security/guarantee amount in 8 relation to the remaining LPG cylinders, which clearly establishes his /nancial involvement in the alleged transaction. The subsequent retransference of the amount cannot, at this stage, exonerate the applicant or wipe out his alleged role in facilitating the transaction. He further submits that the allegations involve misappropriation and unauthorized sale of LPG gas of substantial value, and the investigation has revealed the involvement of several persons acting in concert. The fact that the applicant was not named in the FIR is of no consequence, as his role surfaced during the course of investigation. It is also submitted that the applicant has business relations with Thakur Petro Chemicals and that his alleged role cannot be treated as merely that of an innocent witness when the material collected during investigation indicates his participation as a mediator/guarantor in the transaction. The o:ences alleged are serious in nature and involve a substantial quantity and value of LPG gas, and therefore, considering the nature of allegations, the material collected during investigation and the applicant’s alleged /nancial and facilitating role, the applicant does not deserve the bene/t of bail at this stage. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Considering the prosecution story, the submissions advanced on behalf of the applicant and the material available on record, and further admittedly, fact that the applicant was not named in the FIR and there is no allegation against him in the FIR regarding the entrustment, custody, removal or sale of the LPG cylinders. The six 9 LPG cylinders were admittedly entrusted to Thakur Petro Chemicals on supurdnama, and the principal allegation of criminal breach of trust is against the persons connected with the said establishment. The role attributed to the present applicant is primarily that of a mediator/guarantor between the concerned parties, and the allegation regarding payment of Rs.10 lakhs to him is based upon the memorandum statement of co-accused Pankaj Chandrakar. Apart from the said statement, no independent material appears to have been collected to establish that any amount was actually paid to or received by the applicant. The amount of Rs.30 lakhs transferred to the account of Sonu Traders, of which the applicant is the proprietor, is stated to have been connected with a business transaction relating to gas stoves and was subsequently retransferred to Thakur Petro Chemicals through banking channels much prior to registration of the present FIR. No incriminating amount has been recovered from the applicant and the seizure of gas stoves worth Rs.5,86,000/- is relatable to his stated business. Further, the applicant was not the person to whom the cylinders were entrusted, nor has he been alleged to be the purchaser or seller of the LPG gas. The discrepancy regarding the valuation of the LPG gas and the allegations already forming part of the earlier Crime No. 96/2025 also require consideration at the stage of trial. Further the charge-sheet has been /led in the present case, the present applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, he is jail since 09.05.2026 and, considering the nature of the evidence presently available against him, the limited role attributed 10 to him, the absence of any recovery of alleged proceeds from his possession and the fact that the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the opinion that further incarceration of the applicant is not warranted. 9. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Manish Kumar Choudhary, involved in Crime No. 42/2026 registered, Police Station- Singhoda, District - Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the o:ence punishable under Sections 316(3) , 61(2), 238, 336(3), 338, 340(2), and 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and under Sections 3 & 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 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 /le an undertaking to the e:ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates /xed 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 /xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without suFcient 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 11 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 /xed 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 /xed 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 suFcient 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. 10. OFce is directed to provide a certi/ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan