GANGADHAR JAGAT vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010334522026 2026:CGHC:38579
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 8012 of 2026
Gangadhar Jagat S/o Durjan Singh Jagat Aged About 37 Years R/o
Village Dalalkhar Police Station Basna, District- Mahasamund
Chhattisgarh,
Digitally
signed by
AKHILESH
KUMAR
DEWANGAN
AKHILESH
KUMAR
DEWANGAN
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Basna, District-
Mahasamund Chhattisgarh,
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s) : Ms. Puvlami Das, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
01/09/2026
1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for
grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in
connection with Crime No. 281/2026 registered at Police Station
Basna, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable

2
under Section 316(5) of BNS.
Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 27.05.2026, the
2.
Branch Manager of District Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit,
Branch Pirda, lodged a report at Police Station Basna, District
Mahasamund, alleging that during physical verification of Paddy
Procurement Centre, Bamhni, conducted on 16.05.2026 pursuant
to the Collector's order dated 12.05.2026, a shortage of 3,742
quintals (9,355 bags) of paddy was found against the quantity
reflected in the computerized records. The applicant was posted
as the Centre In-charge at the relevant time and is alleged to have
misappropriated the said paddy, causing a financial loss of
approximately Rs.1,16,00,200/- to the Government, along with
discrepancies in the stock of gunny bags. On the basis of the said
allegations, Crime No.281/2026 was registered at Police Station
Basna for the offence punishable under Section 316(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the applicant was arrested
on 27.05.2026. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet
No.291/2026 dated 31.07.2026 has been filed before the
competent Court for the aforesaid offence. Hence, the bail
application.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has
3.
not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in
offence in question. She further submits that the applicant has
been implicated primarily on the basis of the alleged shortage of

3
3,742 quintals of paddy and the material collected during
investigation, the evidentiary value of which is yet to be tested
during trial. Although the applicant was posted as the Centre In-
charge, mere holding of such post does not establish his
exclusive custody or control over the procured paddy or his
criminal liability for the alleged shortage. The actual cause of
shortage and the specific responsibility of the applicant are
matters requiring appreciation of evidence during trial. She also
submits that the investigation has already been completed and
the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. The
prosecution case is substantially based upon official records,
computerized stock records, inspection reports and other
documentary evidence, which are already in possession of the
prosecution. Therefore, there is no reasonable apprehension of
the applicant interfering with the investigation or tampering with
the prosecution evidence. She later submits that under the
relevant Paddy Procurement Policy, procurement, transportation
and lifting of paddy involved various authorities and agencies,
including the Nodal Officer, Collector, MARKFED and concerned
millers. Since MARKFED was responsible for ensuring lifting of
the paddy, and the alleged shortage was detected on 16.05.2026
after the prescribed period for lifting, the applicant cannot be held
solely responsible merely by virtue of being the Centre In-charge.
The alleged loss of Rs.1,16,00,200/- is based upon the assessed
shortage, and the applicant's individual role and liability are

4
matters to be determined during trial. The applicant is in jail since
27.05.2026, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-
sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its
conclusion. Therefore, she prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail
application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in
the present case. He further submits that the allegation against
the applicant is that, while posted as the In-charge of Paddy
Procurement Centre, Bamhni, he was responsible for the alleged
misappropriation of 3,742 quintals of paddy, resulting in a
shortage of 9,355 bags and causing an alleged financial loss of
approximately Rs.1,16,00,200/- to the Government. Therefore, the
applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and
perused the case diary.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
6.
nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant
since 27.05.2026, the fact that though the applicant while posted
as the In-charge of Paddy Procurement Centre, Bamhni, he was
responsible for the alleged misappropriation of 3,742 quintals of
paddy, resulting in a shortage of 9,355 bags and causing an
alleged financial loss of approximately Rs.1,16,00,200/- to the
Government, but considering the fact that the applicant has no
criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is

5
of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in
this case.
Accordingly, the application is allowed.
7.
Let the Applicant- Gangadhar Jagat, involved in Crime No.
8.
281/2026 registered at Police Station Basna, District-
Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section
316(5) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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.

6
(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.
9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court for necessary information and compliance.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Akhil