2026:CGHC:8130 Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 192 of 2026 Vishnu Agrawal S/o Shri Mamraj Agrawal Aged About 51 Years R/o Khandupara, Narsingh Ward No. 12, Dongargarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

--- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

---Non-Applicant (Cause Title taken from Case Information System)

For Applicant : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate.

For Non-Applicant : Mr. Shuham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order on Board

13.02.2026

1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No. 14/2026 registered at Police Station- Chhuriya, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) under Sections 3 and 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that as per prosecution story, the report was lodged against 10 persons for an offence under Sections 3 & 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 with an averment that, illegal transportation and hoarding of paddy was being done from other states to the committees of Chattisgarh for consumption and as per the orders of Collector, the investigation and checking was done by the authorities and during the checking of trucks coming from inter-state via NH.53, the Trucks bearing registration no. MH14 HU 4811, MH15 GV 4376, MH35 AJ 3499, MH35 AJ 4828, MH40 CD 7246, MH40 CD 9204 was found with illegal transportation and hoarding of paddy amounting Rs. 1,46,90,800/-. The said paddy was seized by the authorities and prima facie, offence under Section 3 & 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 was found to have been committed and pursuant thereto, aforesaid offences were registered against the accused persons including the applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he is innocent and had neither committed nor participate in the above said crime and there was no intention or motive of the applicant to commit the crime. He next submits that there is no prima facie evidence available that the applicant and there is no mention of the applicant in the FIR. He submits that the applicant is not aware of the accused persons (drivers) as also, the applicant was not running any transportation business. The present applicant has been implicated in the aforesaid case and only on the basis of memorandum statement of the accused drivers. He submits that there is no seizure made from the present applicant as also, the applicant was not present at the place of incident. There is no material available against the applicant proving his guilt in the aforesaid offence and there is no witness to prove the case of prosecution. Trial is likely to take substantial time and therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the offences registered against the applicant are serious and of heinous nature and involves grave criminal misconduct. The investigation is still at a crucial stage and custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for proper and effective investigation, including recovery of material evidence and for unearthing the larger conspiracy, if any. He submits that there is clear evidence against the applicant as also, the accused drivers from whom the illegal paddy have been seized have made specific allegations against the applicant for his involvement in the said crime. He submits that there is CDR available against the applicant as also, the statement of one of the co-accused driver proving to hoard and illegally transfer paddy from other states to Chhattisgarh. He submits that the applicant earlier also have committed the aforementioned offence which is substantiated from the