1 2026:CGHC:4952 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 950 of 2026 Lekh Ram Dewangan S/o Late Latel Ram Dewangan Aged About 54 Years R/o LIG - 578, Housing Board Colony, Sejbahar, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer P.S. Economic Offence Wing/ Anti Corruption Bureau (EOW/ ACB), Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Pali, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.01.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 30/2025 registered at Police Station : EOW/ACB, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 7(C)and 12 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. According to the prosecution story, it has been alleged that the applicant, PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.01.30 10:00:17 +0530 2 who was posted as Patwari of Halka No. 24 (Tokaro). Tehsil Abhanpur, District Raipur, entered into a criminal conspiracy with certain individuals who received compensation under the Raipur- Visakhapatnam Economic Corridor project. It is further alleged that in several instances, compensation for land acquisition was disbursed to individuals other than the rightful landowners. As a result of this purported offence, the State Government has allegedly suffered a financial loss amounting to several crores of rupees. The applicant respectfully submits that at the relevant point in time, he was serving in the capacity of Patwari of Halka No. 24, Village Tokaro, Tehsil Abhanpur, District Raipur. During his tenure, one Shri Manharan Sahu, Shri Chuneshwar, Shri Ramaasara and Shri Ishwar, submitted an application under Section 178 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 before the Tahsildar, Abhanpur. In all these applications the learned Tahsildar registered revenue cases and the present applicant had only submitted the patwari report as per the direction/order of the superior authority i.e. Tahsildar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant had no involvement in the alleged offence, and his role was limited to the discharge of routine official duties under lawful instructions issued by the Tahsildar. He further submits that the co-accused persons, namely (i) Vijay Kumar Jain, (ii) Harmeet Singh Khanuja, (iii) Kedar Tiwari and (iv) Uma Tiwari, have already been granted regular bail by this Hon'ble Court in MCRC Nos. 4823/2025, 4994/2025, 5419/2025 and 5280/2025 vide order dated 17.07.2025, and that (v) Smt. Basanti Dhritlahre has also been granted regular bail in MCRC No. 10451/2025 by order dated 02.01.2026, further co-accused, namely, Dinesh Patel has also been granted bail by this 3 Court in MCRC No. 387/2025 vide order dated 13.01.2026. Further, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed and he is in jail since 30.12.2025. As the conclusion of the trial may take considerable time, he therefore prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court but could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the co-accused persons, namely (i) Vijay Kumar Jain, (ii) Harmeet Singh Khanuja, (iii) Kedar Tiwari and (iv) Uma Tiwari, have already been granted regular bail by this Hon'ble Court in MCRC Nos. 4823/2025, 4994/2025, 5419/2025 and 5280/2025 vide order dated 17.07.2025, and that (v) Smt. Basanti Dhritlahre has also been granted regular bail in MCRC No. 10451/2025 by order dated 02.01.2026, further co-accused, namely, Dinesh Patel has also been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 387/2025 vide order dated 13.01.2026, this Court finds that the present applicant stands on an equal footing in terms of the alleged role and benefit and is therefore entitled to parity. Further, taking into account that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 30.12.2025, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 4 7. Let Applicant - Lekh Ram Dewangan, involved in Crime No. 30/2025 registered at Police Station : EOW/ACB, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 7(C)and 12 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860., 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 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. (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 5 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti