1 CGHC010361102026 2026:CGHC:43628 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8920 of 2026  Govind Vishwakarma S/o Late Gopal Vishwakarma Aged About 36 Years R/o Madhuban Muktidham Ke Pass, Dayalband, Police Station City Kotwali, District Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Applicant versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Non-applicant WITH MCRC No. 9027 of 2026  Govind Vishwakarma S/o Late Gopal Vishwakarma, Aged About 36 Years R/o Madhuban Muktidham Ke Pass, Dayalband, Police Station City Kotwali, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Koni District - Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Non-applicant WITH MCRC No. 8974 of 2026  Govind Vishwakarma S/o Late Gopal Vishwakarma, Aged About 36 Years R/o Madhuban Muktidham Ke Pass, Dayalband, Police Station City Kotwali, District Bilaspur C. G. ---Applicant Versus 2  State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur C.G. --- Non-applicant WITH MCRC No. 9044 of 2026  Govind Vishwakarma S/o Late Gopal Vishwakarma, Aged About 36 Years R/o Madhuban Muktidham Ke Pass, Dayalband, Police Station City Kotwali, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Non-applicant For Applicant : Dr. Prachi Diwan, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 08.10.2026 1. The applicant has preferred these First Bail Applications under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with several crimes registered in various Police Stations of District : Bilaspur (C.G.), the particulars of which are detailed below: Case No. Crime No.(P.S.) Offence u/s MCRC/8920/2026 938/2026 (P.S. Sarkanda) Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of IPC MCRC/9027/2026 936/2026 (P.S. Sarkanda) MCRC/8974/2026 937/2026 (P.S. Sarkanda) MCRC/9044/2026 315/2026 (P.S. Koni) Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5), 341(2), 341(4) and 61(2) of BNS 3 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that a report was lodged by Daulat Ram Thakur, Naib Nazir Grade-II, Office of the Tahsildar, Bilaspur (C.G.), alleging that the applicant, along with other co- accused persons, prepared forged documents and fabricated medical records to fraudulently obtain financial assistance of ₹4,00,000/- under the Government Snake Bite/Poisonous Animal Bite Death Assistance Scheme, thereby causing loss to the State exchequer. It is further alleged that the applicant manipulated official records in connection with the incident. On the basis of the said allegations, several crimes as stated above were registered against the applicant, and he was subsequently arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a daily-wage employee of Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur and he has falsely been implicated in these cases. He further submits that the applicant has neither committed any offence nor played any role in obtaining the financial assistance in question by fraudulent means and the amount was sanctioned and disbursed by the competent Government authorities only after due scrutiny and verification of the relevant documents; therefore, the applicant cannot be held responsible merely because the financial assistance was subsequently questioned. He contends that Post-Mortem Report itself records the cause of death as "snake bite", which squarely falls within the scope of the aforesaid scheme and there is no material on record to show that the 4 applicant fabricated any document or practised deception at the inception of the claim. He further contends that even assuming there is any dispute regarding entitlement or eligibility for obtaining the financial assistance, the same is essentially administrative in nature and, in the absence of the essential ingredients of cheating, would not constitute an offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code; thus, the continued incarceration of the applicant is wholly unwarranted. The applicant is in jail since 19.06.2026 and has seven criminal antecedents including the present cases in connection with the same episode; therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail applications and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. It is alleged that the applicant, in connivance with other co-accused persons, concealed the actual cause of death and fraudulently obtained financial assistance to the tune of ₹4,00,000/- under the Government’s Snake Bite/Poisonous Animal Bite Death Assistance Scheme, thereby causing wrongful loss to the State exchequer; thus, no case is made out for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material collected during the 5 course of investigation, the fact that the Post-Mortem Report reflects the cause of death as snake bite, and taking into account the detention of the applicant since 19.06.2026 as well as the absence of previous criminal antecedents excluding the cases registered against him in connection of the same episode, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out a case for the grant of regular bail. The allegations levelled against the applicant are matters to be tested during the course of trial, and the continued pre-trial detention of the applicant would not serve any fruitful purpose, especially when the respective trials are likely to take some time to conclude. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the cases, the present bail applications are allowed. 8. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required; (b)he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court; and (c) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial. 6 The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding these bail applications only, the learned trial Court shall decide the respective cases on their own merits. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.10.08 16:55:58 +0530