1 2025:CGHC:17894 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 541 of 2025 Sangeeta Ketan Shah W/o Shri Ketan Moolchand Shah Aged About 48 Years R/o A5, Surya Vihar Colony, Junwani, Bhilai, Motilal Nehru Nagar, Bhilai, P.S. Supela, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO, Police Station Pulgaon, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For applicant : Shri B.P. Singh and Shri Jaideep Singh Yadav, Advocates. For Respondent/State : Shri Amit Verma, PL. For complainant : Smt. Fouzia Mirza, Sr. Advocate with Shri Ali Afzal Mirza, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21/04/2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.109/2025 GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.04.23 16:26:02 +0530 2 registered at Police Station – Pulgaon, District Durg (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 420 of the IPC. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 07/04/2025 the complainant namely Vishal Kejriwal has lodged a complaint alleging that the applicant has received 1 Crore Rupees but after getting the said amount, she has not executed the sale deed in the favour of complainant. It is further alleged that according to the agreement dated 24/06/2022 the complainant has paid Rs. 50,00,000/- to the applicant on 21/06/2022 and on dated 22/06/2022 he has paid Rs. 50,00,000/- through RTGS to the applicant and applicant has also executed a General Power of Attorney on dated 24/06/2022 in the favour of complainant and it was settled by both the parties that after demarcation the sale deed would be executed in the favour of complainant and it is also alleged that according to agreement it is stated by the applicant that from the west side there is road and the complainant has requested to arrange the road on the west side repeatedly but the applicant has not arranged the road on the west side and given a wrong details in the agreement. On dated 16/01/2025 the complainant has personally met with the applicant and requested to arrange road on the west side of the disputed land but thereafter also applicant has failed to arrange the said road and thus the applicant has committed the said offence. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that looking to the contents of FIR, prima facie no case is made out under section 420 of the IPC and more over after more than 3 years, the 3 complainant has lodged this false FIR. He would submit that the entire grievance of the complainant is civil in nature and it is alleged that the applicant has not executed the sale deed after receiving Rs. 1,00,00,000/- according to the agreement of the land in question. He would submit that when the complainant has acted pressure and tried to make fool to the applicant by saying that applicant is not arranging the road upon the west side of the land in question, and also asked to return his amount and then applicant has returned the amount of Rs. 55,10,000 through bank mode in the firm of complainant. He would submit that the complainant has suppressed the material fact before police station that he has already received around Rs. 55,10,000/-. He would submit that the applicant is the director of Reputed company in the area of Chhattisgarh known as Simplex Castings Ltd. situated at Bhilai and if the applicant will be arrested then her reputation and the social respect will be completely ruined. Therefore, he submits that the present applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the non - applicant/State as also learned counsel appearing for the complainant opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it appears that dispute between the parties is civil in nature, also considering the fact that after 3 years FIR has been lodged and applicant is a lady, therefore, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 4 8. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Sangeeta Ketan Shah, on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, she shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) The applicant shall not involve herself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice gouri