1 2026:CGHC:26673 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3620 of 2026 Manish Kumar Shrivastava S/o Late Shri Asharfi Lal Shrivastava Aged About 54 Years Post Deputy Ranger, Jakadbandha Surhi Range Achanakmar Tiger Range Lormi, Distt. Mungeli Chhattisgarh Present R/o H. No. 87 Mangal Marge, J.P. Vihar Colony, Bilaspur Tehsil And Distt. Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Anti Corruption Bureau/ Economic Offence Wing Raipur, Unit Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pratyaksh Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Digitally signed by ABHISHEK ABHISHEK SHRIVAS SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.01 Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 17:00:20 +0530 Order on Board 30.06.2026 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. 0/2026 (as per order-sheet) and Crime No. 16/2026 (as per FIR) registered at Police Station – A.C.B./E.O.W. Raipur, Unit Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended Act 2018. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the complainant, Ajit Kumar Vaishnav, submitted a written complaint before the Anti-Corruption 2

Bureau, Bilaspur, on 07.03.2026, stating that, in the month of December 2025, he, along with his friends, had visited the Achanakmar Tiger Reserve (ATR), Suri Area, and recorded a reel/video with an air gun, which subsequently went viral. Pursuant thereto, the Forest Department initiated action against the complainant and three others by registering offences under the relevant provisions of the Forest Act. The complainant and two of his friends remained in custody for about 18 days, and his four-wheeler vehicle was also seized. Thereafter, upon being released on bail, the complainant appeared before the concerned Court. On 06.03.2026, he met the applicant and requested him to file the charge-sheet at an early date. It is alleged that the applicant demanded illegal gratification of Rs. 4,000/- to Rs. 5,000/- for filing the charge-sheet and Rs. 70,000/- for facilitating the release of the seized vehicle. On the basis of the said allegation, the complainant submitted a written complaint before the Anti-Corruption Bureau on 07.03.2026. Acting upon the said complaint, the A.C.B., Bilaspur, arranged a trap on 26.03.2026, during which the applicant was allegedly caught red-handed at New Milan Dhaba & Restaurant, Kargi Road, Kota, Bilaspur. It is alleged that a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was recovered from the applicant, and the conversation between the applicant and the complainant was also recorded. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, an offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as amended by the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018, was registered against the applicant. The applicant was arrested on 26.03.2026 and is presently in judicial custody.

3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present crime, which was never committed by him, therefore, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. He submits 3

that according to the prosecution, the pre-trap and post-trap panchnamas have already been completed on 26.03.2026. Hence, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in custody. It is highly improbable that the applicant would demand a sum of Rs. 4–5 lakhs merely for filing the charge-sheet. In fact, the complainant and his two friends remained in judicial custody for more than 15 days on the complaint lodged by the present applicant, and the complainant’s four-wheeler vehicle was also seized due to its involvement in the alleged illegal activity. Consequently, offences under the Wildlife (Protection) Act were registered against the complainant, Ajeet Vaishnav, and others. Therefore, in order to settle the said case and to protect themselves from the consequences of the aforesaid offences, the applicant has been falsely implicated as an act of vengeance. He also submits that the applicant is a public servant and has already been placed under suspension from service. Furthermore, the offences alleged against the applicant are neither punishable with death nor with imprisonment for life. He further submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 26.03.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court.

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 further the fact that the applicant has already been suspended from his duties due to his conduct, moreover, the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and the applicant is in jail 4 since 26.03.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some 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 – Manish Kumar Shrivastava, involved in Crime No. 0/2026 (as per order-sheet) and Crime No. 16/2026 (as per FIR) registered at Police Station – A.C.B./E.O.W. Raipur, Unit Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended Act 2018, 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 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. 5 (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

1 2026:CGHC:26673 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3620 of 2026 Manish Kumar Shrivastava S/o Late Shri Asharfi Lal Shrivastava Aged About 54 Years Post Deputy Ranger, Jakadbandha Surhi Range Achanakmar Tiger Range Lormi, Distt. Mungeli Chhattisgarh Present R/o H. No. 87 Mangal Marge, J.P. Vihar Colony, Bilaspur Tehsil And Distt. Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Anti Corruption Bureau/ Economic Offence Wing Raipur, Unit Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pratyaksh Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Digitally signed by ABHISHEK ABHISHEK SHRIVAS SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.01 Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 17:00:20 +0530 Order on Board 30.06.2026 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. 0/2026 (as per order-sheet) and Crime No. 16/2026 (as per FIR) registered at Police Station – A.C.B./E.O.W. Raipur, Unit Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended Act 2018. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the complainant, Ajit Kumar Vaishnav, submitted a written complaint before the Anti-Corruption 2

Bureau, Bilaspur, on 07.03.2026, stating that, in the month of December 2025, he, along with his friends, had visited the Achanakmar Tiger Reserve (ATR), Suri Area, and recorded a reel/video with an air gun, which subsequently went viral. Pursuant thereto, the Forest Department initiated action against the complainant and three others by registering offences under the relevant provisions of the Forest Act. The complainant and two of his friends remained in custody for about 18 days, and his four-wheeler vehicle was also seized. Thereafter, upon being released on bail, the complainant appeared before the concerned Court. On 06.03.2026, he met the applicant and requested him to file the charge-sheet at an early date. It is alleged that the applicant demanded illegal gratification of Rs. 4,000/- to Rs. 5,000/- for filing the charge-sheet and Rs. 70,000/- for facilitating the release of the seized vehicle. On the basis of the said allegation, the complainant submitted a written complaint before the Anti-Corruption Bureau on 07.03.2026. Acting upon the said complaint, the A.C.B., Bilaspur, arranged a trap on 26.03.2026, during which the applicant was allegedly caught red-handed at New Milan Dhaba & Restaurant, Kargi Road, Kota, Bilaspur. It is alleged that a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was recovered from the applicant, and the conversation between the applicant and the complainant was also recorded. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, an offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as amended by the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018, was registered against the applicant. The applicant was arrested on 26.03.2026 and is presently in judicial custody.

3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present crime, which was never committed by him, therefore, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. He submits 3

that according to the prosecution, the pre-trap and post-trap panchnamas have already been completed on 26.03.2026. Hence, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in custody. It is highly improbable that the applicant would demand a sum of Rs. 4–5 lakhs merely for filing the charge-sheet. In fact, the complainant and his two friends remained in judicial custody for more than 15 days on the complaint lodged by the present applicant, and the complainant’s four-wheeler vehicle was also seized due to its involvement in the alleged illegal activity. Consequently, offences under the Wildlife (Protection) Act were registered against the complainant, Ajeet Vaishnav, and others. Therefore, in order to settle the said case and to protect themselves from the consequences of the aforesaid offences, the applicant has been falsely implicated as an act of vengeance. He also submits that the applicant is a public servant and has already been placed under suspension from service. Furthermore, the offences alleged against the applicant are neither punishable with death nor with imprisonment for life. He further submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 26.03.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court.

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 further the fact that the applicant has already been suspended from his duties due to his conduct, moreover, the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and the applicant is in jail 4 since 26.03.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some 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 – Manish Kumar Shrivastava, involved in Crime No. 0/2026 (as per order-sheet) and Crime No. 16/2026 (as per FIR) registered at Police Station – A.C.B./E.O.W. Raipur, Unit Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended Act 2018, 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 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. 5 (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