[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Gendlal Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 12 March, 2026
1
2026:CGHC:11932
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 1199 of 2026
Gendlal Sahu S/o Ramavtar Sahu Aged About 44 Years R/o- Village Dabo,
Police Station- Fasterpur Setganga, Tahsil- Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Fasterpur
Setganga District Mungeli (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State. : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Govt. Advocate.
Digitally
signed by
ABHISHEK
ABHISHEK
SHRIVAS Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
SHRIVAS Date:
2026.03.13
Order on Board
11:35:07
+0530
12.03.2026
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. 12/2026 registered
at Police Station Fasterpur, Setganga, District - Mungeli (C.G.), for the
offences punishable under Section 318(4), 316(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay
Sanhita (BNS).
2. As per the prosecution story, the applicant was working as the In-charge
of the Paddy Purchase Center at Chhatan, and it is alleged that he
permitted the miller to transport paddy without attaching a GPS-enabled
vehicle and also allowed overloading. As a result, a loss amounting to Rs.
85,02,341/- was allegedly caused.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is
innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the foresaid
case. He submits that the applicant permitted the transportation of paddy
to the miller in accordance with the delivery order issued by the District
Marketing Officer, Mungeli, in the discharge of his official duties. He
further submits that the applicant had no authority to check whether the
vehicles used by the millers for transportation of paddy were equipped
with GPS or not. The applicant had no authority to verify the loading
capacity of the vehicles used by the millers for transportation of paddy.
He also submits that there is no provision in the Paddy Purchase Policy
2025-2026 mandating that paddy must be transported only through
GPS-enabled vehicles or strictly within the prescribed loading capacity.
On 17.01.2026, the Nodal Officer of Zila Sahakari Kendriya Bank
Maryadit, Mungeli, issued a notice calling for an explanation regarding
the alleged facts. The said notice was received by the applicant, and
thereafter the applicant requested the concerned authority to provide the
enquiry report dated 16.01.2026 and the ICCC alert report for the
purpose of submitting his reply. However, the concerned authority failed
to provide the said documents and proceeded to arrest the applicant. He
submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is
in jail since 20.01.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some time,
therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of
the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already
been submitted before the competent Court in the present case.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and
the fact that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents,
furthermore, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the
competent Court in the present case and the applicant has been
languishing in jail since 20.01.2026, conclusion of the trial may take
some more time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is
entitled to be released on bail in this case.
7. Let the Applicant - Gendlal Sahu, involved in Crime No. 12/2026
registered at Police Station Fasterpur, Setganga, District - Mungeli
(C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 318(4), 316(5) of the
Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), 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 his 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.
8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court
concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Abhishek
