1 2026:CGHC:15582 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3041 of 2026 Ajay Kumar Sharma S/o B.R. Sharma Aged About 60 Years R/o. Govindpur, P.S. Kotwali, District Kanker (C.G.) At Present Excise Sub Inspector, Circle Bacheli, District Dantewada (C.G) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Bacheli, District Dantewada (C.G) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. T.K. Jha, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilang, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 06/04/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.49/2025, registered at Police Station : Bacheli, District- ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.04.07 10:49:04 +0530 2 Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 316(5), 336(3), 318, 338, 340, 61 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that as per the prosecution case, on 25.11.2025, a surprise inspection was conducted at the English Composite Liquor Shop, Bacheli. During the course of physical verification of the shop, an amount of ₹92,09,370/- (Rupees Ninety-Two Lakh Nine Thousand Three Hundred Seventy only) was found. It was further revealed that an amount of ₹60,38,404/- (Rupees Sixty Lakh Thirty-Eight Thousand Four Hundred Four only) had not been deposited in the bank account. Thus, a total amount of ₹1,52,47,774/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty-Two Lakh Forty-Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy-Four only) was found to have been misappropriated/embezzled by the accused persons, namely, Kosuri Chandrashekhar, Rakesh Uike, Devendra Kumar Paikara, Deepak Yadav, and the present applicant, who was posted as Excise Sub-Inspector in Excise Circle, Bacheli. It is alleged that the said embezzlement of money was committed during the period from 01.10.2025 to 24.11.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is 3 innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant is suffering from a kidney stone and has been advised surgery by the doctor, and the relevant medical documents are filed and annexed here with Annexure A/3. It is also further submitted that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 10419/2025, MCRC No. 1554/2026, and MCRC No. 1754/2026, which is allowed by this Court vide order dated 29/01/2026, 24/03/2026 respectiverly. Therefore he submits that the present applicant is also entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the non- applicant/State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant has been rightly implicated in the present case on the basis of material collected during investigation. It is submitted that the offence is serious in nature, involving misappropriation of a substantial amount of public money. However, the learned State counsel does not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 10419/2025, MCRC No. 1554/2026, and MCRC No. 1754/2026. It is further submitted that the investigation has revealed the involvement of the present 4 applicant, and therefore, he is not entitled to the benefit of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary as well as the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the medical condition of the applicant, the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted bail, and the period of custody undergone by the applicant since 28.11.2025, and without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that a case for grant of bail is made out. Accordingly, the present bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on regular bail upon furnishing a personal bond along with one solvent surety in such sum as may be fixed by the learned Trial Court, subject to the conditions that he shall appear before the Trial Court on all dates fixed, shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, and shall not induce or threaten any witness. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Ajay Kumar Sharma, involved in Crime No.49/2025, registered at Police Station : Bacheli, District- Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 316(5), 336(3), 318, 338, 340, 61 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya 5 Sanhita, 2023, 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 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 misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS is issued and the applicant fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in 6 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Arpan