1 2025:CGHC:22003 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 726 of 2025 1 - Venkat Raju B. N. S/o Narayan B.V. Aged About 51 Years R/o House No. 104, 2nd Main 6th Cross, Kengri Settalite Town, Bangalore South, Bangalore (Karnataka). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station- Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Sagar Soni, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.05.2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 440/2022 registered at Police Station – Kurud, District -Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420, 34 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.05.13 17:59:17 +0530 2 2. The prosecution's case, in brief, is that the complainant filed a report at Kurud Police Station, alleging that the present applicant, under the pretext of providing civil work at NMDC, obtained Rs.51,40,000/- in various installment from him. Based on the complainant's report, present crime was registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the applicant is resident of Bangalore(Karnataka) and on 08/03/2025, the prosecution issued notice, thereafter, the applicant applied for transit bail, which was allowed for three weeks. He further submits that the dispute between the parties was civil in nature and the complainant is trying to convert it into criminal case. Moreover, as far as the transaction of amount is concerned, in the FIR, complainant has not given any detail regarding the payment that when and how, the aforesaid transaction took place. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application of the applicant 5. Learned counsel appearing for the objector opposes the anticipatory bail application of the present applicant and submits that the present applicant, on the pretext of providing job, obtained huge amount of money from the complainant, therefore he is not entitled 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 and particularly considering that in the FIR, complainant has not given any detail 3 regarding the transaction, by which, the alleged money has been transferred in the account of the applicant and also that, when and how,the alleged transaction took place, therefore, without commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Venkat Raju B.N., on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he 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 him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him 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) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. SD/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Jyoti/Rahul