1 CGHC010332092026 2026:CGHC:38325 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7947 of 2026 1 - Irfan Khan S/o Ismail Khan Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Q-310, R.D.A. Colony, Veer Savarkar Nagar, Jarway Alias Heerapur, Tatibandh, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Salauddin Khan S/o Alauddin Khan Aged About 30 Years R/o House No. 215, Sonar Kolki, Ward No. 7, Sarsinwa, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 3 - Motiram Dadsena S/o Ghanshyam Dadsena Aged About 33 Years R/o Village - Fatamunda, Police Station Agalpur, District Balangir Odisha ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Pithora, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Gaurav Singhal, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 31.08.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 172/2026 registered, Police Station- Pithora, District - Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the offence punishable RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the basis of a written complaint dated 04.07.2026 submitted by the Forest Range Officer, Pithora, District Mahasamund (C.G.), the police registered a criminal case alleging that on 17.06.2026, a vehicle bearing Registration No. CG-07-CM-5860, transporting approximately 23,350 kilograms of Khair wood, was intercepted near Pithora, and the driver of the said vehicle produced an NTPS (National Transit Pass System) No Objection Certificate bearing No. AP/KU/K/KU- 160 dated 14.06.2026 in support of the transportation of the said wood. It is further alleged that the aforesaid NTPS document was found to be forged/fabricated and was used for transporting the Khair wood. Pursuant thereto, the concerned police registered FIR bearing Crime No. 172/2026 dated 09.07.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 against the applicants and other co-accused persons. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case and that their names do not find place in the FIR and their arrest has been made solely on the basis of the memorandum of the co- accused. It is further submitted that the applicants have not committed any act as alleged by the prosecution and that the material collected during investigation does not disclose any prima facie case against them. He further submits that similarly situated 3 co-accused persons namely, namely, Manish Agrawal and Himanshu Rathi have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Hon’ble Court vide orders dated 11.08.2026 and 14.08.2026 in MCRCA Nos. 1289/2026 and 1329/2026 respectively, and another co-accused, namely, Prashant Kumar Bhoi has already been granted regular bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 14.08.2026 in MCRC No. 7532/2026, and therefore, the applicants are entitled to the benefit of parity. It is also submitted that the prosecution case is primarily based upon the allegation that the NTPS NOC/Bilti bearing No. AP/KU/K/KU-160 dated 14.06.2026 was forged; however, there is no allegation or material to show that the applicants created, fabricated, altered, uploaded or manipulated the said document or had any role in the operation of the Government-operated National Transit Pass System, and the applicants merely relied upon the document generated through the official portal in the bona fide belief that it was genuine and valid. It is further submitted that the essential ingredients of the alleged offences, including cheating, forgery and use of forged document, are not prima facie made out against the applicants, as no specific act of deception, fabrication or manipulation has been attributed to them. He further submits that the mandatory procedure contemplated under Section 52 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, in respect of seizure and reporting of the seized forest produce to the competent Magistrate, has not been duly complied with by the respondent authorities. He also submits that the applicants have no previous criminal antecedents and applicant Nos. 1 & 2 are in jail 4 since 31.07.2026 and applicant No.3 is in jail since 08.08.2026, the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicants and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted regular bail as well as anticipatory bail by this Court and the case of the present applicants are identical to that of the co-accused. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, the fact that though the allegation against the applicants is that they, in connivance with the co- accused, were involved in using a forged NTPS NOC for transportation of approximately 23,350 kilograms of Khair wood, but it is also to be noted that the other co-accused persons namely, namely, Manish Agrawal and Himanshu Rathi have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 11.08.2026 and 14.08.2026 in MCRCA Nos. 1289/2026 and 1329/2026 respectively, and another co-accused, namely, Prashant Kumar Bhoi has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 14.08.2026 in MCRC No. 7532/2026, and the case of present applicants is identical to that of the co-accused persons, further the present applicants have no previous criminal antecedents and 5 applicant Nos. 1 & 2 are in jail since 31.07.2026 and applicant No.3 is in jail since 08.08.2026, the conclusion of the trial will take some more time, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the Applicants – Irfan Khan, Salauddin Khan and Motiram Dadsena, involved in Crime No. 172/2026 registered, Police Station- Pithora, District - Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 6 (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan