1 CGHC010319072026 2026:CGHC:37856 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7872 of 2026 Kamal Basod S/o Samaru Basod Aged About 27 Years R/o Chandmari Turipara Police Station – Kotwali, District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Kotwali, Raigarh District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.08.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 187/2026 registered at Police Station : Kotwali, Raigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 316(5), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 60 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, the complainant, namely Kamal Kishore Shah, who is one of the owners of Shri Ram Transport Company, lodged an FIR on 05.04.2026 alleging that financial fraud had been committed by two of his employees, namely Prakash Mishra and Deepak Sharma. It is alleged that the complainant discovered that duplicate bill PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.08.25 11:22:43 +0530 2 vouchers bearing identical numbers had been prepared for different vehicles to authorize fraudulent payments. These duplicate bill vouchers were allegedly prepared in the names of six individuals, including the present applicant, resulting in a wrongful loss of Rs.32,00,000/- to the company. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that one of the co-accused, as alleged by the prosecution, has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in MCRCA No. 660/2026 vide order dated 04.05.2026, while another co-accused has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 5049/2026. He further submits that the charge-sheet has not yet been filed in the present case, that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and that he has been in custody since 29.06.2026. It is further submitted that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has not yet been filed before the competent Court in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and further taking into consideration the fact that one of the co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in MCRCA No. 660/2026 vide order dated 04.05.2026, while another co-accused has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 3 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 5049/2026, it is further observed that the charge-sheet has not yet been filed in the present case, it is also relevant to note that, in the bail application of the co-accused who was granted bail by this Court, learned State counsel had inadvertently made an incorrect submission that the charge-sheet had already been filed, further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has been in custody since 29.06.2026, considering that the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let applicant, Kamal Basod, involved in Crime No. 187/2026 registered at Police Station : Kotwali, Raigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 316(5), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 60 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount 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 him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (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. 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 Preeti