Praveen Tiwari vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2026 Latest Caselaw 279 Chatt

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 279 Chatt
Judgement Date : 10 March, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Praveen Tiwari vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 March, 2026

Author: Ramesh Sinha

Bench: Ramesh Sinha

                                                           1




                                                                          2026:CGHC:11429


                                                                                           NAFR

                             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                                MCRCA No. 375 of 2026
GOURI
MUDALIAR
                   Praveen Tiwari, Aged About 44 Years S/o S.K. Tiwari R/o - H No.236/18, Virat
Digitally signed
by GOURI           Nagar, Behind Kadam Plaza, Street No. 01, Durg, Chhattisgarh.
MUDALIAR
Date: 2026.03.11
11:26:16 +0530                                                                       ... Applicant


                                                         versus


                   State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Civil Lines, Raipur, District -
                   Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                                   ... Respondent

For Applicant : Shri Tushar Dhar Diwan, Advocate.

                   For                     :   Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy.G.A.
                   Respondent/State


                                       Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
                                                    Order on Board

                   10/03/2026

1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who

is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.225/2022

registered at Police Station - Civil Lines Raipur, District Raipur (C.G)

for the offences punishable under Section 420 and 468 of the Indian

Penal Code.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that that the complainant lodged an

FIR which relates to a recruitment process for the post of Sub-Engineer

conducted in the year 2011. Regarding the said recruitment, it has

been alleged that the applicant, while filling in the OMR form, marked

"yes" in the columns relating to minimum educational qualification and

registration with the employment office, whereas according to the

prosecution, he did not possess the required qualifications as of the

cut-off date i.e. 23.03.2011. Later, in 2022, in compliance with the order

dated 09.08.2021 of the JMFC, Raipur, an FIR was filed by the police.

The committee constituted upon receiving the complaint found that the

advertisement was vague and that neither the applicant nor the

appointing authority exhibited any malicious intent. Despite this, the

present offence was registered against 89 candidates related to the

recruitment process, in which the applicant has also been made an

accused, due to which he has become apprehensive of arrest.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is

completely innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He

would submit that the alleged recruitment process dates back to the

year 2011, whereas the FIR has been lodged in the year 2022 with an

inordinate and unexplained delay of about 11 years, which makes the

prosecution story prima facie doubtful. He would submit that the

appointment of the applicant was made by the competent and

authorized authority following due procedure and the departmental

enquiry clearly found that the advertisement was vague and neither the

applicant nor the appointing authority had any malafide intention. He

would submit that in similar facts and circumstances, the co-accused

persons have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in MCRCA

No.1293/2025 on 26/08/2025, in MCRCA No. 1460/2025 on

23/09/2025, in MCRCA No. 1486 of 2025 on 24/09/2025 and total 64

persons have already granted bail out of 73 accused. He would submit

that the applicant is a permanent resident of address shown in the

cause title of the bail application and undertakes to cooperate with the

investigation, therefore, he submits that the present applicant is entitled

to be released on anticipatory bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the non -

applicant/State, opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but do

not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons have been granted

anticipatory bail by this Court.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials

available on record.

6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submission of

learned counsel for the parties, considering the fact that co-accused

persons have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in MCRCA

No.1293/2025 on 26/08/2025, in MCRCA No. 1460/2025 on

23/09/2025, in MCRCA No.1486 of 2025 on 24/09/2025, without

commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant

anticipatory bail to the present applicant.

7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the

event of arrest of the applicant - Praveen Tiwari, on executing a

personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the

arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following

conditions:-

(a) The applicant 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.

(b) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be

prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.

(c) The applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each

and every date given to him by the said Court till

disposal of the trial.

(d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his

adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo

having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be

verified by the trial Court.