[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Banke Bihari Nishad vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 16 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12480
NAFR
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
Digitally
signed by
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
MCRC No. 2378 of 2026
1 - Banke Bihari Nishad S/o Gopal Ram Nishad Aged About 24 Years R/o
Ward No. 19, Sangharsh Chowk, Shankar Nagar, Nayapara Gobra, P.S.
Gobra Nayapara, District Raipur Chhattisgarh
2 - Kunjbihari S/o Gopal Ram Nishad Aged About 30 Years R/o Ward No.
19, Sangharsh Chowk, Shankar Nagar, Nayapara Gobra, P.S. Gobra
Nayapara, District Raipur Chhattisgarh
... Applicants(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station -
Rajim, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh
... Non-applicants(s)
For Applicants : Mr. Amitabh Verma, Advocate along with Ms.
Anju Verma, Advocate.
For Non-applicants/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
16/03/2026
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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime
No. 145/2025 registered at Police Station- Rajim, District-
Gariyaband (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections
317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(A) and 3(5) of the BNS.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 17.05.2025, Police
Station Rajim, District Gariyaband (C.G.) registered Crime No.
145/2025. It is alleged in the FIR that, based on reliable information
received through the Coordination Portal operated by the Ministry of
Home Affairs, Government of India, the police investigated a mule
bank account racket. During the course of investigation, seven mule
bank accounts were identified in the Bank of Maharashtra, Rajim
Branch (C.G.), and transactions amounting to Rs. 4,16,96,238/-
were found to be related to the crime committed by unknown
persons. The allegation against the present applicants is that
certain transactions were reflected in their bank accounts bearing
No. 605093400556 and 60509274354 maintained with the Bank of
Maharashtra. It is further alleged that, out of greed, they provided
their bank accounts to other persons and received
commission/dividends in return. Based upon such, aforementioned
offences were registered against the applicants along with co-
accused.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants are
innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is
further submitted that the bail application of co-accused Mohnish
Kumar Tandiya was earlier rejected by this Court, however, he
preferred SLP (Crl.) No. 18750/2025 before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court and vide order dated 22.01.2026, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
has been granted bail to him. It is also submitted that another
similarly situated co-accused, namely Pawan Kumar Miri, has been
granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 985/2026, vide order dated
29.01.2026. The applicants is in judicial custody since 18.05.2025
and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time.
Therefore, on the ground of parity and prolonged detention, the
applicants prays for grant of bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel, appearing for the
State/non-applicants, submit that the charge-sheet has been filed
before the competent Court and the trial is currently in progress.
She further concur with the submission made on behalf of the
applicants to the effect that the principle of parity may be
considered, however, she contend that the serious nature of the
offences, the ongoing investigation and the possibility of influencing
witnesses weigh against granting bail to the applicants at this stage.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused
the case diary.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case that the bail
application of co-accused Mohnish Kumar Tandiya was earlier
rejected by this Court, however, he preferred SLP (Crl.) No.
18750/2025 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and vide order
dated 22.01.2026, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been granted
bail to him and further considering the fact that another similarly
situated co-accused, namely Pawan Kumar Miri, has been granted
bail by this Court in MCRC No. 985/2026, vide order dated
29.01.2026 and the applicants are in judicial custody since
18.05.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take
considerable time and in the present case, charge-sheet has been
filed before the competent Court and the applicants have no
criminal antecedents thus, without further commenting anything
on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicants.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants are allowed.
8. Let the applicants - Banke Bihari Nishad and Kunjbihari,
involved in Crime No. 145/2025 registered at Police Station- Rajim,
District- Gariyaband (C.G.), for the offence punishable under
Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(A) and 3(5) of the BNS., be
released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two
sureties each, in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court
concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect
that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial
court on each date fixed, either personally or through
their counsel. In case of their absence, without
sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against
them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail
during trial and in order to secure their presence,
proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued
and the applicants fails to appear before the court on
the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial
court shall initiate proceedings against them, in
accordance with law, under Section 209 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iv) The applicants 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 applicants are
deliberated 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 them 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. dorthwith.
- S/- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Kunal
