Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:47773 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6796 of 2025 Krishna Kumar Gupta S/o Sharda Prasad Gupta Aged About 38 Years R/o Quarter No. C/57, Subhash Block, Secl, Korba, Tahsil And District - Korba, At Present R/o Lormi, Tahsil - Lormi, District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh. versus ... Applicant State of Chhattisgarh Through The Incharge, Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur, Unit Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Wrongly Mention Page No. 9 Distt - Mungeli) ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Krishna Kumar Dewangan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Dr. Saurabh K. Pande, Deputy A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 17.09.2025 Order on Board 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 40/2025, registered at Police Station : Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur, Unit Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Amended Act, 2018. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 19.06.2025, the 2 complainant, Nand Kumar Sahu, lodged a written report before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, A.C.B., Bilaspur, stating that a few days earlier, he had submitted an application at the Electricity OfÏce, Lormi, for an electricity connection to his house situated at Village Pali. On 11.06.2025, the applicant, who was posted as a Junior Engineer in CSPDCL, Lormi, visited the complainant’s house for inspection and allegedly cut the electricity wire, accusing the complainant of illegally consuming electricity. It is alleged that the applicant then demanded a bribe of Rs.50,000/- to avoid penal action, and when the complainant expressed his inability to pay such an amount, the demand was reduced to Rs.15,000/- for settlement of the matter. Unwilling to pay the bribe, the complainant approached the ACB and requested that the applicant be caught red-handed. Acting on this complaint, the ACB ofÏcials organized a trap and allegedly recovered the bribe amount of Rs.15,000/- from the applicant on 20.06.2025, leading to the filing of the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to previous enmity. It is submitted that the complainant, who runs an electronic repair shop at Village Pali, was illegally consuming electricity through hooking without lawful authority. During inspection, the applicant, then posted as Junior Engineer, CSPDCL, Lormi, found the illegal connection and disconnected the electricity supply, which annoyed the complainant, leading to threats of false 3 implication. It is further submitted that the amount of Rs.15,000/- given by the complainant was not a bribe but payment for lawful electricity connections Rs.7,200/- for two tube wells and Rs.7,800/- for two houses. The applicant never demanded or accepted any bribe. The applicant has already been transferred to Seepat and subsequently suspended due to the false allegations. He has an unblemished service record, no criminal antecedents, and he is in jail since 20.06.2025, the charge-sheet has been filed, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He also submits that on 19.06.2025, the complainant, Nand Kumar Sahu, lodged a report before the ACB, Bilaspur, alleging that the applicant, posted as Junior Engineer in CSPDCL, Lormi, demanded a bribe of Rs.50,000/- for not taking penal action for alleged illegal electricity consumption, which was later reduced to Rs.15,000/-. Acting on the complaint, a trap was organized, and on 20.06.2025, the applicant was allegedly caught red-handed with the bribe money. It is argued that the offence is serious and involves corruption, and therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, 4 nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that though the allegations against the applicant are serious, involving demand and acceptance of a bribe of Rs.15,000/-, but he is in jail since 20.06.2025 and further considering the fact that the present applicant has no criminal antecedent, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Let the applicant, Krishna Kumar Gupta, involved in Crime No. 40/2025, registered at Police Station : Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur, Unit Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Amended Act, 2018, be released on bail on furnishing 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 sufÏcient 5 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. (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 sufÏcient 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. 8. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Rahul Dewangan Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice