1 2025:CGHC:14363 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 406 of 2025 1 - Toshan Singh S/o Dilip Singh Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Semariya, P.S. And Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli (C.G.) 2 - Diwakar Singh Rajput S/o Dilip Singh Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Semariya, P.S. And Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Lormi, District Mungeli (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Akath Kumar Yadav, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 25.03.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of Second Anticipatory Bail, apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 116/2024, registered at Police Station – Lormi, District- Mungeli (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 2. The earlier anticipatory bail application of the applicant has been dismissed as withdrawn by this Court in MCRCA No. 121 of 2025 vide order dated 23.01.2025 with liberty to file a fresh bail RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 application when occasion arises. 3. According to the prosecution's case, the complainant, Ramayan Singh Rajput, lodged a report against the applicants, alleging that he had given Rs. 25 lakhs to them on the assurance that they would secure a government job for his brother, Basant Singh Rajput, for the post of Sub-Inspector. Thereafter, Police Station Lormi registered a case as Crime No. 116/2024 for an offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the applicants. 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated. It is submitted that the applicants are young boy and they preparing the completion exam for last three years. He further submits that according to the complainant vacancy was arrived in year of 2018 and he giving the amount in the year of 2021 to 2023 and he lodged the FIR in the year of 2024 i.e. after more two years delay. He further submits that applicant No.01 has one criminal antecedent which is pending and applicant No.02 has no criminal antecedent. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the anticipatory bail application of the present applicants and submits that the present applicants allegedly assured the complainant that they would provide government job for the post of Sub-Inspector and obtained a total amount of Rs. 25 Lakhs from the complainant, but 3 no jobs were provided, therefore, the present applicants are not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail in the present case. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Perusal of the case diary goes to show that the present applicants allegedly assured the complainant that they would provide government job and obtained a total amount of Rs. 25 Lakhs from the complainant, but no jobs were provided, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it does not seem appropriate to grant bail to the applicants. 8. Accordingly, the second anticipatory bail application of the applicants – Toshan Singh and Diwakar Singh Rajput, involved in Crime No. 116/2024, registered at Police Station – Lormi, District- Mungeli (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, is rejected. 9. However, it will be open for the prosecuting agency to initiate prosecution against the complainant of the present case also who claims to have been cheated by the applicant herein as the conduct of the complainant amounts to giving bribe for obtaining employment through illegal mode. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan