1 2025:CGHC:25442 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3465 of 2025 Shekh Sagar S/o Shekh Sadik Aged About 34 Years R/o Gausiya Chowk, Sanjay Nagar, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station, Gunderdehi, District- Balod (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 18.06.2025 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. 45/2025, registered at Police Station : Gunderdehi, District- Balod, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’). 2. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that an FIR was lodged on 03.03.2025 by one Yogendra Kumar Srivas against unknown persons, alleging that an individual named Krishna Yadav had RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 visited his house claiming to clean brass utensils and provide gift items in return. On this assurance, the complainant handed over four brass utensils worth Rs. 14,000/-, which were not returned within the promised time. Upon further inquiry, it was discovered that the said person had similarly taken utensils from other villagers as well, thereby committing cheating. Hence, the FIR was registered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant has no role in the commission of the alleged offence. The FIR was lodged against unknown persons, and merely because the applicant also repairs and cleans utensils, he has been wrongly implicated and arrested by the police. There is absolutely no evidence linking him to the alleged offence. In fact, the applicant, who repairs old utensils, had taken a few utensils home for repair, but due to personal reasons and unforeseen difficulties, he could not complete the work on time. It was only because of this delay that the complainant, in frustration, lodged a complaint against him, though no crime was committed. The FIR, therefore, is nothing more than a hasty reaction to the delay. The applicant’s arrest is based purely on apprehension, misinformation, and misunderstanding. The items seized by the police were simply those kept for completing the repair work, and it cannot be presumed that they were retained with any intention to cheat. Moreover, the applicant has already returned the repaired utensils to their owners, and as such, no offence of cheating or 3 misappropriation is made out against him. He further submits that the present applicant has no any previous criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 07.03.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail in the present case. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the objector opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the applicant had visited complainant house claiming to clean brass utensils and provide gift items in return. On this assurance, the complainant handed over four brass utensils worth Rs. 14,000/-, which were not returned within the promised time. Upon further inquiry, it was discovered that the said person had similarly taken utensils from other villagers as well, thereby committing cheating. Therefore, the present applicant is not entitled to be granted regular bail in this case. 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 that though the applicant has committed fraud by taking four brass utensils worth Rs. 14,000/- from the complainant with promises to clean brass utensils and provide gift items in return, but nothing incriminating has been seized or recovered from his possession and further the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court and the applicant has no any previous criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 07.03.2025, the conclusion of the trial may 4 take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Shekh Sagar, involved in Crime No. 45/2025, registered at Police Station : Gunderdehi, District- Balod, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 sufficient 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 5 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 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. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan