1 CGHC010334522026 2026:CGHC:38579 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8012 of 2026 Gangadhar Jagat S/o Durjan Singh Jagat Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Dalalkhar Police Station Basna, District- Mahasamund Chhattisgarh, ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Basna, District- Mahasamund Chhattisgarh, ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Puvlami Das, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01/09/2026 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 281/2026 registered at Police Station Basna, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 under Section 316(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 27.05.2026, the Branch Manager of District Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit, Branch Pirda, lodged a report at Police Station Basna, District Mahasamund, alleging that during physical verification of Paddy Procurement Centre, Bamhni, conducted on 16.05.2026 pursuant to the Collector's order dated 12.05.2026, a shortage of 3,742 quintals (9,355 bags) of paddy was found against the quantity reflected in the computerized records. The applicant was posted as the Centre In-charge at the relevant time and is alleged to have misappropriated the said paddy, causing a financial loss of approximately Rs.1,16,00,200/- to the Government, along with discrepancies in the stock of gunny bags. On the basis of the said allegations, Crime No.281/2026 was registered at Police Station Basna for the offence punishable under Section 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the applicant was arrested on 27.05.2026. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet No.291/2026 dated 31.07.2026 has been filed before the competent Court for the aforesaid offence. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. She further submits that the applicant has been implicated primarily on the basis of the alleged shortage of 3 3,742 quintals of paddy and the material collected during investigation, the evidentiary value of which is yet to be tested during trial. Although the applicant was posted as the Centre In- charge, mere holding of such post does not establish his exclusive custody or control over the procured paddy or his criminal liability for the alleged shortage. The actual cause of shortage and the specific responsibility of the applicant are matters requiring appreciation of evidence during trial. She also submits that the investigation has already been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. The prosecution case is substantially based upon official records, computerized stock records, inspection reports and other documentary evidence, which are already in possession of the prosecution. Therefore, there is no reasonable apprehension of the applicant interfering with the investigation or tampering with the prosecution evidence. She later submits that under the relevant Paddy Procurement Policy, procurement, transportation and lifting of paddy involved various authorities and agencies, including the Nodal Officer, Collector, MARKFED and concerned millers. Since MARKFED was responsible for ensuring lifting of the paddy, and the alleged shortage was detected on 16.05.2026 after the prescribed period for lifting, the applicant cannot be held solely responsible merely by virtue of being the Centre In-charge. The alleged loss of Rs.1,16,00,200/- is based upon the assessed shortage, and the applicant's individual role and liability are 4 matters to be determined during trial. The applicant is in jail since 27.05.2026, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge- sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, she prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the allegation against the applicant is that, while posted as the In-charge of Paddy Procurement Centre, Bamhni, he was responsible for the alleged misappropriation of 3,742 quintals of paddy, resulting in a shortage of 9,355 bags and causing an alleged financial loss of approximately Rs.1,16,00,200/- to the Government. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 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, period of detention of the applicant since 27.05.2026, the fact that though the applicant while posted as the In-charge of Paddy Procurement Centre, Bamhni, he was responsible for the alleged misappropriation of 3,742 quintals of paddy, resulting in a shortage of 9,355 bags and causing an alleged financial loss of approximately Rs.1,16,00,200/- to the Government, but considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is 5 of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Gangadhar Jagat, involved in Crime No. 281/2026 registered at Police Station Basna, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 316(5) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum 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. (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. 6 (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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil