1 CGHC010327832026 2026:CGHC:38160 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7941 of 2026 Vinod Kumar Rathour S/o Narayan Prasad Rahour Aged About 46 Years R/o Lig 150, Shivaji Nagar, Police Station Rampur, Tahsil Korba, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh. (Name of Applicant Wrongly Mention As Vinod Kumar Rathour In Bail Application A/3.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O:cer, Police Station- City Kotwali, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pritam Singh, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Dy. Advocate General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 25.08.2026 1. This is the First bail application =led 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. 59/2026 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District – Raigarh (C.G.), for the oAence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, namely, the Assistant Superintendent, Head Post O:ce, Raigarh, lodged a written complaint stating that the co-accused, Narendra and Sonam Sahu, had ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.08.25 16:32:01 +0530 2 applied online for the post of Gram Dak Sevak (GDS) in the year 2023. At the time of document veri=cation, it came to light that the mark-sheets submitted by Narendra and Sonam Sahu were fake/forged. Thereafter, an FIR was registered on 11.02.2026. Subsequently, the co-accused, Narendra and Sonam Sahu, were arrested by the police. In their respective memorandum statements, they allegedly named the present applicant, pursuant to which the applicant was also made an accused in the present case. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested on 13.07.2026, and the charge-sheet has already been =led before the learned Trial Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the co-accused, namely, Narendra Kumar Chandra has already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 2436 of 2026 vide order dated 28.04.2026. Therefore, it is contended that the present applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been =led in the present case. However, he could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused person has already been granted regular bail by this Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the co-accused, namely, Narendra Kumar Chandra has already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 2436 of 2026 vide order dated 28.04.2026, also considering the fact that the 3 charge-sheet has already been =led before the competent Court and that the applicant has been in jail since 13.07.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Bail of the Applicant – Vinod Kumar Rathour, involved in Crime No. 59/2026 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District – Raigarh (C.G.), for the oAence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two 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 eAect 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 su:cient 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 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. 4 (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 su:cient 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. O:ce is directed to send a certi=ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek