1 CGHC010306442026 2026:CGHC:35694 signed byRUCHI Digitally NAFR RUCHIYADAV YADAV HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1302 of 2026 1 - Sainath Kerketta S/o- Late Khulsai Kerketta, Aged About 60 Years Occupation- Job (Senior Cooperative Inspector) R/o- Village Kapatbahri, Post Poksari, P.S. Sitapur, Tahsil Batauli, District -Surguja (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station Sitapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Deputy Advocate General Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.08.2026 1. This is the first anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by the applicant, who apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 188/2026 registered at Police Station Sitapur, District Surguja (C.G.), for the 2 offences punishable under Sections 318, 316(5), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that after the death of the Manager of Adivasi Seva Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Kerju, on 25.01.2025, certain agriculturists complained that amounts repaid by them towards agricultural loans were not credited to their respective loan accounts. Pursuant to the said complaints, an inquiry was conducted on the directions of the Collector, Surguja, wherein certain suspicious entries and irregularities were found in the accounts. It was alleged that signatures of 58 out of 74 agriculturists were found suspicious. On the basis of the inquiry report, the present FIR has been registered against the applicant and other persons for the alleged irregularities in the Society.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is a Cooperative Inspector, aged about 60 years, and is due to retire shortly. He further submits that the case of the present applicant is distinguishable from that of the co-accused whose applications were rejected by this Court in M.Cr.C.A. No. 1046/2026 vide order dated 08.07.2026, M.Cr.C.A. No. 1078/2026 vide order dated 13.07.2026 and M.Cr.C.A. No. 1109/2026 vide order dated 15.07.2026, as the role attributed to the present applicant is different. It is further submitted that co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C.A. No. 1145/2026 vide order dated 20.07.2026 and M.Cr.C.A. No. 1089/2026 vide order dated 13.07.2026, and the applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity. Learned counsel further 3 submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that, looking to the nature and gravity of the alleged offence and the material available on record, the applicant does not deserve the benefit of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is prayed that the present anticipatory bail application be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

6. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the fact that the applicant is a Cooperative Inspector aged about 60 years and is due to retire shortly, has no criminal antecedents and that similarly placed co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C.A. No. 1145/2026 vide order dated 20.07.2026 and M.Cr.C.A. No. 1089/2026 vide order dated 13.07.2026, whereas the cases in which bail was rejected are distinguishable on their facts and the role attributed to the present applicant is different, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant deserves to be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Sainath Kerketta 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) He shall not, directly or indirectly, make any 4 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts to the Court. (b) He shall not act in any manner which may be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial. (c) He shall appear before the Trial Court on each and every date fixed by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

(d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of their Aadhaar cards along with a full-size coloured postcard photograph bearing the printed Aadhaar number, which shall be verified by the Trial Court. (e) He shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Ruchi

1 CGHC010306442026 2026:CGHC:35694 signed byRUCHI Digitally NAFR RUCHIYADAV YADAV HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1302 of 2026 1 - Sainath Kerketta S/o- Late Khulsai Kerketta, Aged About 60 Years Occupation- Job (Senior Cooperative Inspector) R/o- Village Kapatbahri, Post Poksari, P.S. Sitapur, Tahsil Batauli, District -Surguja (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station Sitapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Deputy Advocate General Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.08.2026 1. This is the first anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by the applicant, who apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 188/2026 registered at Police Station Sitapur, District Surguja (C.G.), for the 2 offences punishable under Sections 318, 316(5), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that after the death of the Manager of Adivasi Seva Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Kerju, on 25.01.2025, certain agriculturists complained that amounts repaid by them towards agricultural loans were not credited to their respective loan accounts. Pursuant to the said complaints, an inquiry was conducted on the directions of the Collector, Surguja, wherein certain suspicious entries and irregularities were found in the accounts. It was alleged that signatures of 58 out of 74 agriculturists were found suspicious. On the basis of the inquiry report, the present FIR has been registered against the applicant and other persons for the alleged irregularities in the Society.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is a Cooperative Inspector, aged about 60 years, and is due to retire shortly. He further submits that the case of the present applicant is distinguishable from that of the co-accused whose applications were rejected by this Court in M.Cr.C.A. No. 1046/2026 vide order dated 08.07.2026, M.Cr.C.A. No. 1078/2026 vide order dated 13.07.2026 and M.Cr.C.A. No. 1109/2026 vide order dated 15.07.2026, as the role attributed to the present applicant is different. It is further submitted that co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C.A. No. 1145/2026 vide order dated 20.07.2026 and M.Cr.C.A. No. 1089/2026 vide order dated 13.07.2026, and the applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity. Learned counsel further 3 submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that, looking to the nature and gravity of the alleged offence and the material available on record, the applicant does not deserve the benefit of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is prayed that the present anticipatory bail application be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

6. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the fact that the applicant is a Cooperative Inspector aged about 60 years and is due to retire shortly, has no criminal antecedents and that similarly placed co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C.A. No. 1145/2026 vide order dated 20.07.2026 and M.Cr.C.A. No. 1089/2026 vide order dated 13.07.2026, whereas the cases in which bail was rejected are distinguishable on their facts and the role attributed to the present applicant is different, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant deserves to be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Sainath Kerketta 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) He shall not, directly or indirectly, make any 4 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts to the Court. (b) He shall not act in any manner which may be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial. (c) He shall appear before the Trial Court on each and every date fixed by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

(d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of their Aadhaar cards along with a full-size coloured postcard photograph bearing the printed Aadhaar number, which shall be verified by the Trial Court. (e) He shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Ruchi