1 2025:CGHC:21099 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 657 of 2025 Fuljens Toppo S/o Late Albert Toppo Aged About 63 Years Retired Ranger, R/o Mahapour Para, Ward No. 1, Bhagwanpur Nagar, Ambikapur, Police Station- Gandhinagar, Tahsil- Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O., Police Station- Gandhinagar, Tahsil- Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Rishikant Mahobia, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri U.K.S. Chandel, Dy.A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 07/05/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.432/2024, registered at Police Station Gandhinagar, Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). for alleged commission of offence GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.05.08 18:27:39 +0530 2 punishable under Sections 420,467,468,471,120B, 34 of Indian Penal Code. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the FIR dated 19.07.2024 has been lodged against the present applicant alongwith other co-accused persons on the basis of written complaint made at Gandhinagar Police Station, stating that they have cheated the complaint's son namely Nilesh Ekka and daughter namely Roshan Ekka on pretext of providing job to them as Junior Officer in Indian Oil Company and as such they have taken a sum of Rs. 1,79,39,682/- from the complainant. Hence FIR has been registered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the complainant and no such offence have been committed by him. He would submit that the prosecution has failed to prove that the applicant has taken amount from the complainant or his son and daughter on the pretext of providing job. He would further submit that the applicant has not given any assurance to the complainant for providing job to his son and daughter. He would submit that only allegation against the applicant in the FIR is that on his assurance, the complainant has given a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- to co- accused Praveen Tigga. He would submit that no specific role has been attributed to the applicant in the alleged transaction of money between the complainant and the co-accused Praveen Tigga. He would further submit that there is no evidence on record to suggest that the applicant demanded, received or handed over any money from the complainant and FIR itself does not disclose any over act or active 3 participation by the applicant in the alleged offence, therefore he prays to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and he would submit that anticipatory bail application of co-accused person namely Smt. Nirmala Toppo who is wife of the present applicant has been rejected by this Court vide MCRCA No. 650 of 2025 on 05/05/2025. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, also considering the gravity and seriousness of offence and the fact that anticipatory bail application of co-accused person namely Smt. Nirmala Toppo who is wife of the present applicant has been rejected by this Court vide MCRCA No. 650 of 2025 on 05/05/2025 , as such, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant - Fuljens Toppo, involved in Crime No.432/2024, registered at Police Station Gandhinagar, Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 420,467,468,471,120B, 34 of Indian Penal Code is rejected. Sd/- Sd S S Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice gouri