2026:CGHC:3842 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 974 of 2025 Shri Tanveer Ahamed S/o Shri Siraj Ahamed Aged About 36 Years (Now About 53 Years), R/o Mosimpura Parradand, Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh Former Veterinary Doctor, Block Development, Ambikapur Chhattisgarh (Now District Sarguja Chhattisgarh)

... Petitioner versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Superintendent Of Police, Department Of Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Shri P.K. Sharma S/o Late Shri Rajaram Sharma Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Jogidipa, Pamgarh, Chhattisgarh The Then Chief Executive Officer

3. Shri Heeramani Singh Baghel S/o Late Shri Ramsingh Baghel Aged About 48 Years R/o Village/ Post Mohar, District Satna, Madhya Pradesh

4. Shri Rustam Khan S/o Tajuddin Khan Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Digitally signed by ABHISHEK ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Sakarkoni, Thana Majhigaon, District Gadwa, Bihar SHRIVAS Date:

2026.01.29

11:02:51 +0530 5. Shri Badri Prasad S/o Kaluram Aged About 31 Years R/o Mu. Po. Artara, District Banda, Uttar Pradesh

6. Shri Om Prakash S/o Bechu Singh Aged About 35 Years R/o Boripara, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh

7. Abdul Rehman Kirmani S/o Hafiz Habib Ulla Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Churawal, Tehsil Churawal, Thana Churawal, District Soanbhadra, Uttar Praesh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. T.K. Tiwari, Advocate.

For Respondent No.01 /State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Government Advocate and Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order on Board

22.01.2026

1. Heard Mr. T.K. Tiwari, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Government Advocate and Ms. Anusha Naik, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for respondent No. 01/State.

2. By this petition under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’), the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 25.01.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (Anti Corruption Act), Ambikapur, Sarguja (C.G.) in Case No. 01/2019 by which the application filed by the petitioner under Section 348 of the BNSS had been rejected.

3. Brief facts of the case is that in the year 1994–95, the petitioner was posted as an Assistant Veterinary Surgeon at Ambikapur. The then State Government of Madhya Pradesh issued a circular regarding the distribution of milch animals to beneficiaries belonging to the special category. To implement the Government scheme, a Committee was constituted under the chairmanship of the Collector, Ambikapur. As per the prescribed rules, applications were invited from interested candidates belonging to the covered categories. After approval of the applications by the Committee, suppliers of high-breed milch animals were invited, and proposed rates were obtained. After scrutiny and verification of the proposed rates, the concerned suppliers (animal suppliers) were directed to supply animals of the prescribed standards. The animals were supplied, and the beneficiaries were invited to check the milking capacity and breed of the animals. The animals were also physically examined by the Medical Officer, i.e., the petitioner. After proper verification and satisfaction of the beneficiaries, in the presence of the then Collector and other authorized officers, the animals were handed over to the beneficiaries. Thereafter, letters of satisfaction were obtained after confirmation of the milking capacity.

4. As per the Government rules, recovery proceedings relating to the loan amount of the milch animals were initiated against the beneficiaries by issuing notices. At that stage, an anonymous complaint was made alleging the supply of desi cows and unhealthy animals. In fact, high- breed milch animals were supplied, which required proper care and diet; however, the beneficiaries failed to provide proper meals/diet and care to the animals. As a result, some of the animals fell ill and their milking capacity was reduced. Further, no proper treatment was provided,