Sudhir Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:23578

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 5089 of 2026

¶6

Sudhir Kumar Sahu S/o Ramchandra Sahu Aged About 42 Years R/o Village-Mathpara Bilaspur Chowk- Ambikapur, Police StationMadipur, District- Sarguja, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Of Police Station-Kansabel, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

... Respondent(s)

¶11

(Cause title taken from CIS)

¶12

Digitally
signed bySHOAIB
SHOAIB ANWAR
ANWAR Date:2026.06.04
14:58:45
+0530

¶13

For Applicant : Shri Sanjeev Kumar Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Shri Dharmesh Shrivastav, Dy. Govt. Advocate

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

04.06.2026

¶17

1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under

¶18

Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

¶19

2

¶20

for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 0127/2025, registered at Police Station Kansabel, District Jashpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 408, 420 and 411 of IPC.

¶21

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that FIR dated 02.07.2022 was lodged by the complainant, Ashwani Nagar, against the present applicant and other co-accused persons alleging misappropriation and unauthorized sale of entrusted gunny bags (rice bags). During investigation, it was found that the present applicant had knowingly purchased the said property from the co-accused persons, including Rizwan Ali. On the basis of the material collected and memorandum statements of the accused persons, offences punishable under Sections 408, 420 and 411 of the IPC were registered. The present applicant was subsequently arrested in connection with the case.

¶22

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in judicial custody since 24.03.2026 and the charge-sheet has already been filed in the matter. It is submitted that the prosecution case against the applicant is based on the allegation that he had purchased gunny bags allegedly

¶23

3

¶24

belonging to cooperative societies and used for storage and transportation of rice and paddy. Learned counsel submits that the applicant is engaged in the business of purchase and sale of old gunny bags and had purchased the same from the main accused, Rizwan Khan, who was working as a transporter for cooperative societies under the State Government.

¶25

4. It is further submitted that there exists no specific criterion or guideline by which an ordinary purchaser can distinguish gunny bags used by cooperative societies from those generally available in the open market. Therefore, it cannot be said that the applicant had knowingly purchased any misappropriated property, and as such, no offence under Sections 408, 420 or 411 of the IPC is made out against him. It is also contended that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and, considering that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶26

4

¶27

5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant had purchased the gunny bags of the Cooperative Society from the transporter who had allegedly embezzled the gunny bags and rice during their transportation from the Cooperative Society to the rice mills. Therefore, considering the applicant's alleged involvement in the offence, he is not entitled to the grant of bail.

¶28

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents.

¶29

7. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for

¶30

the applicant that the applicant is engaged in the business of purchase and sale of gunny bags; that the gunny bags in question were purchased by him in the ordinary course of business and in good faith; that no material has been collected by the prosecution to demonstrate or identify how the gunny bags allegedly belonging to the Cooperative Society can be distinguished from those purchased by the applicant from the main accused, Rizwan Khan; and further considering that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant is in judicial custody since 24.03.2026, therefore,

¶31

5

¶32

I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

¶33

8. Let the applicant, Sudhir Kumar Sahu , involved in Crime No.

¶34

0127/2025, registered at Police Station Kansabel Dist. District Jashpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 408, 420 & 411 of IPC, be released on bail on furnishing personal

¶35

bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶36

(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.

¶37

(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.

¶38

(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

¶39

6

¶40

proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

¶41

(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.

¶42

9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

(Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge

¶45

Shoaib

Sudhir Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhir Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajkumar Ratre Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramshila Mahadeva Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ravishankar Baghel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Loknath Dahriya Vs Smt. Priti Dahriya

Ramkumar Arvind Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Anish Kumar Pondi Vs State of Chhattisgarh