1 2026:CGHC:7322 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1436 of 2026 Shivcharan Kaushal S/o Itwari Ram Kaushal Aged About 55 Years R/o Village And Police Station Dumarpali District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Sho Police Station Nandani, District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, P.L. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/02/2026 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. 201/2025 registered at Police Station Nandani, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 3(5), 111(2) of BNS and Sections 66(c) & 61(2) of IT Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 13 August 2025, a report was lodged by the complainant, the concerned Tahsildar, Shri Radheshyam Verma, Tahsil Office Ahiwara, at Police Station Nandini, alleging that some unknown persons had illegally accessed and tampered with the Bhuiyan software of Tahsil Ahiwara by using the login ID of a Patwari. It is alleged that forged Rin Pustikas were created in respect of the concerned land, whereby the area and other land records were fraudulently altered. On the basis of the said forged documents, an application for loan was submitted to the State Bank of India, and after the loan was sanctioned in the name of one Dinu Ram Yadav, the said fraud came to the knowledge of the Tahsildar. It is further alleged that the accused persons obtained the loan amount by fraudulent means and misappropriated the entire amount. During the course of investigation, the police found the present applicants to be involved in the aforesaid offence and arrested them. 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. He further submits that two of the identically situated co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court, co-accused, namely, Komal Chand Sahu has been granted 3 regular bail by this Court vide order dated 28.01.2026 in MCRC No.919/2026 and co-accused, Shiyankhik Verma has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 23.09.2025 in MCRCA No.1483/2025. The applicant is in jail since 25.11.2025, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge- sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 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 applicant in connivance with other co-accused persons, illegally accessed and tampered with the Bhuiyan land record software by using a Patwari’s ID, prepared forged Rin Pustika and land records, and on the basis of such forged documents obtained a bank loan from the State Bank of India, 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 25.11.2025, the fact that though the applicant is alleged to have been involved in tampering with land records through forged documents and used the same to fraudulently obtained a bank 4 loan from SBI, but considering the fact that two of the co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court, co-accused, namely, Komal Chand Sahu has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 28.01.2026 in MCRC No.919/2026 and co- accused, Shiyankhik Verma has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 23.09.2025 in MCRCA No.1483/2025 and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused persons, further the applicant has no criminal antecedents and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Shivcharan Kaushal, involved in Crime No. 201/2025 registered at Police Station Nandani, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 3(5), 111(2) of BNS and Sections 66(c) & 61(2) of IT Act, 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 5 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 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