ANSHUMAN SINGH vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Digitally signed
by AJINKYA
PANSARE
Date: 2026.10.29
16:03:56 +0530
1

CGHC010398472026 2026:CGHC:45716
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 9557 of 2026
 Anshuman Singh S/o Satyendra Singh, Aged About 28 Years R/o
Ward No. 48 Lodhipara, Sarkanda, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur
(C.G.) (Applicant Father's Name Wrongly Mentioned In Annexure
A/1 )
... Applicant
versus
 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police
Station- Farasgaon, District - Kondagaon (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Sushil Dubey, Advocate
For Non-Applicant :
Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Dy.G.A.
Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board
29.10.2026
This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the
1.
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail
to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime
No. 51/2026 registered at Police Station : Farasgaon, District :
Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420,
467, 468, 471, 120-B and 34 of Indian Penal Code.

2
2. The prosecution story in brief is that the complainant lodged a
written report on 19.04.2026 to the effect that, between
01.07.2023 and 18.10.2023, the main accused, Ajay Kumar Nag,
induced him to take loans from different banks on the assurance
that 65% of the loan liability would be borne by him, the said
amount would be invested in the share market, and he would
repay the EMIs. The allegation against the present applicant, who
is a bank employee, is that he assisted the main accused,
tampered with the addresses of the victims on their Aadhaar
cards, facilitated loans for them, and received a 2% commission.
On the basis of the complaint, the police registered an offence as
stated above and arrested the applicant on 04.07.2026.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has
3.
been falsely implicated in the present case solely on the basis of
the memorandum statements of the co-accused persons. He
further submits that although the prosecution has reported that the
applicant has two live criminal antecedents of a similar nature
pending against him, copies of the corresponding FIRs have been
placed on record, which clearly show that the applicant is not a
named accused in either of the FIRs. He contends that the co-
accused persons, namely Sunit Kishore Barwa and Ajay Kumar
Nag (the main accused), have been granted anticipatory bail by
the coordinate Bench in MCRC/1351/2026 and MCRC/1392/2026.
He further contends that the charge-sheet has already been filed,

3
the applicant has been in jail since 04.07.2026, and the
conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time; therefore, he
prays for the grant of regular bail to the present applicant.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail
application of the present applicant and submits that applicant has
two live criminal antecedents of similar nature, therefore, he is not
entitled for grant of regular bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
From a careful perusal of case diary, it is quite vivid that applicant
6.
was not initially named in the FIR and he was implicated in the
present case on the basis of memorandum statements of the
named accused persons. The prosecution has reported that the
applicant has two live criminal antecedents of a similar nature
pending against him, copies of the corresponding FIRs have been
placed on record, which clearly show that the applicant is not a
named accused in either of the FIRs.
Pertinently, the named accused persons Sunit Kishore Barwa and
7.
Ajay Kumar Nag (main accused) have already been granted
anticipatory bail by co-ordinate Bench in MCRC/1351/2026 and
MCRC/1392/2026. Also considering the fact that the investigation
is complete, charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant is in
custody since 04.07.2026 and the trial is likely to take

4
considerable time, without commenting on the merits of the case,
this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow
the application on the ground of parity. Accordingly, the bail
application is allowed.
8. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal
bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned
trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following
conditions:-
(a) he shall make himself available for interrogation
by the police officer as and when required;
(b)he shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the
Court; and
(c) he shall not act in any manner which will be
prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial.
The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of
deciding this bail application only, the learned trial Court shall
decide the case on its own merits.
- Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
JUDGE
A j i n k y a