[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Arun Chandrakar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 February, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:9852
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 1568 of 2026
Arun Chandrakar S/o Ramu Chandrakar Aged About 35 Years R/o Ward
No.05, Mahli, Police Station And Tahsil Kunda, District - Kabirdham,
Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant(s)
Digitally
AKHILESH signed by
KUMAR AKHILESH
DEWANGAN KUMAR
DEWANGAN
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station -
Baramkela, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Vaishali Mahilang, Dy. G.A.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
25/02/2026
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. 53/2025 registered at Police Station
Baramkela, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence
punishable under Sections 316(5), 336(3), 340(2), 338, 318(4)
and 3(5) of BNS.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a report was lodged at
Police Station Baramkela alleging large-scale financial
irregularities and embezzlement in the KCC (Kisan Credit Card)
accounts operated through the Seva Sahakari Samiti Branch,
Baramkela. It is alleged that funds pertaining to farmers' KCC
accounts were illegally transferred and misappropriated by
showing fraudulent IMPS transactions and by manipulating
records in the name of D.M.R. cash/card holders, thereby making
the accounts appear nil. The total amount alleged to have been
embezzled is approximately Rs.9,91,20,877.69. On the basis of
the said report, the police registered an offence under Sections
316(5), 356(3), 340(2), 338, 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 against the present applicant.
After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed
before the competent Court and the applicant was arrested on
02.12.2025. 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 four of the identically
situated co-accused persons, namely, Minakshi Manjhi, D.R.
Baghmare, Ashish Patel and Khir Das Mahant have already been
granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 18.11.2025 and
11.11.2025 in MCRC Nos.9295 of 2025, 5325 of 2025, 8700 of
2025 and 7502 of 2025, respectively. The applicant is in jail since
02.12.2025, 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.
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. She further submits that the applicant allegedly
while being associated with the operations of KCC accounts at
Baramkela, he was involved in illegal and doubtful financial
transactions whereby funds of farmers were misappropriated
through manipulation of records and unauthorized IMPS transfers.
She further submits that amounts were shown as transferred in
the name of D.M.R. cash/card holders, accounts were made nil by
fraudulent entries, and a total sum of approximately
Rs.9,91,20,877.69 was embezzled, thereby causing wrongful loss
to the concerned bank and beneficiaries. She also submits that
the present applicant is maintaining two bank accounts, and that
transactions amounting to Rs.23,00,000/- have been reflected
therein. 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 02.12.2025, the fact that though the applicant allegedly
misappropriated farmers' KCC founds by making fraudulent
entries and unauthorized IMPS transfers, thereby embezzling
approximately Rs.9.91 crores, but considering the fact that four of
the identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Minakshi
Manjhi, D.R. Baghmare, Ashish Patel and Khir Das Mahant have
already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated
18.11.2025 and 11.11.2025 in MCRC Nos.9295 of 2025, 5325 of
2025, 8700 of 2025 and 7502 of 2025, respectively, further and
the applicant has no criminal antecedent 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. Let the Applicant-Arun Chandrakar, involved in Crime No.
53/2025 registered at Police Station Baramkela, District -
Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under
Sections 316(5), 336(3), 340(2), 338, 318(4) and 3(5) of BNS, 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
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
