1 2026:CGHC:13821 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 440 of 2026 Jeetram Bharti S/o Ramesh Bharti, Aged About 40 Years R/o Vill.- Thalipali, P.S. And Tah. Sarsiva, Dist.- Sarangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S.- City Kotwali Sarangarh,dist. Sarangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Adv. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 23.03.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this 7rst anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 124/2018, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, Sarangarh, District – Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for alleged commission of o9ence punishable under Sections 403, 405, 415, 418, 420, 424, 34 of IPC and Section 6 and 10 of CG Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005 and Section 3, 4 and 5 of Prize Chitfund and Money Circulation Act, 1987. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. Learned State counsel raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the present anticipatory bail application, as the same is not maintainable in view of the provisions contained in Section 15 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors (Interest) Act, 2005, to which learned counsel for the applicant submits that bar of Section 15 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors’ Interest Act, 2005 will not apply where the complaint does not make out a prima facie case under the Act of 2005. 3. In view of the aforesaid preliminary objection raised by the learned State counsel regarding the maintainability of the present anticipatory bail application and upon consideration of the rival submissions advanced on this aspect, this Court finds substance in the objection so raised. From a prima facie perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the allegations attract the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors’ Interest Act, 2005, and in such circumstances, the statutory bar contained under Section 15 of the said Act comes into operation. Consequently, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present anticipatory bail application is not maintainable. 4. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as not maintainable. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal