1 2026:CGHC:15603 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 500 of 2026 1 - Ramkaran Sahu S/o Shri Jugdhar Aged About 32 Years R/o Gudripara Police Station And Distt- Narayanpur (C.G.) 2 - Tilak Ram Mandavi S/o Shri Mangtu Ram Aged About 36 Years R/o Gadhbegal Police Station And Distt- Narayanpur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Sho, Police Station Narayanpur Distt- Narayanpur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Vaibhv A. Goverdhan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 06.04.2026 1. The applicants have preferred this anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 21/2026, registered at Police Station – Narayanpur, District – Narayanpur (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 3(5), 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita for short- BNS, 2023. 2. According to the prosecution story, on 23.02.2026 the Branch Manager of Punjab National Bank, Narayanpur, namely Manish VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.04.07 16:20:48 +0530 2 Kumar Soni, has lodged a written report against one Gopal Singh Samund and the applicants herein alleging that, Gopal Singh Samund working as Daftari in PNB, Narayanpur Branch; Tilak Ram Mandavi, recovery agent & husband of Sumitra Mandavi, Operator of B.C. Centre; & Ramkaran Sahu, recovery agent and ors. have by forging the Aadhar number of saving bank accounts and photographs of the customers, have withdrawn total Rs. 30,67,500/-. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicants are merely working as Operator of B.C. centre and recovery agent, respectively and under the banking laws, they have no rights or power or jurisdiction to change the KYC of customers of any bank. He also submits that, as per FIR, allegations have been made regarding continuous withdrawal of amounts from 18 accounts since 17.08.2024. However, if such transactions had actually taken place, the same ought to have been reflected in the audit report for the financial year 2024–2025. It is pointed out that no irregularity or embezzlement has been detected in the said audit. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and further submits that He also submits that, as per FIR, allegations have been made regarding continuous withdrawal of amounts from 18 accounts since 17.08.202. she further submits that applicant No.1, namely Ramkaran Sahu has one criminal antecedent bearing crime No.82 of 2025 registered at Police Station Narayanpur for the offence under 3 Sections 317(2), 317(5), 318(4) of BNS. Therefore, they are not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record, the allegations pertain to unauthorized withdrawals from multiple bank accounts, which indicate a serious economic offence and the contention of the applicants regarding lack of authority to change KYC details and reliance on the audit report are matters of defence, which cannot be conclusively adjudicated at this stage. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the requirement of custodial interrogation, and the stage of investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant No.1– RAmkaran Sahu and applicant No.2 Tilak Ram Mandavi filed under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 involved in Crime No.60/2025, registered at Police Station – Balod, District – Balod (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(v) and 111 of BNS, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali