1 2025:CGHC:21100 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 656 of 2025 Yashwant Kumar S/o Budhram Aged About 33 Years R/o Banesar Post- Jairamnagar, Police Station- Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Rajpur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 07/05/2025 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.90/2025 registered at Police Station – Rajpur District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offences punishable under GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.05.08 17:55:39 +0530 2 Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that applicant being a Sub- Registrar posted at Rajpur by hatching a well-planned conspiracy with other co-accused has committed the fraud and has done the registry of complainant mother(Jubaro Bai) land bearing khasra no. 210, 213/2, 215, 240/10, 241/1, 245 rakba no. 0.656,0.097,0.150,1.259,0.172,0.134 Hect situated at Tehsil Rajpur, in the name of co-accused namely Shiva Ram and as per the prosecution allegation against the present applicant is that land belongs to the Joint property of the Jubaro Bai (victim) family and Jubaro Bai is co-shareholder of the said land and applicant without the consent and presence of the co-shareholder has done the registry and the applicant without the permission of the S.D.O. (Revenue)/competent authority has done the registry, which is necessary because victim Jubaro Bai belongs to the special backward tribe pahaadikorwa. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that in the present FIR only allegations against the present applicant is that being a Sub-registrar, applicant without the presence and consent of the co-shareholder of the land has done the registry and without the permission of the competent authority has done the registry. He would further submit that the 3 Smt. JubaroBai who is the co-shareholder of land was present in the registrar office at the time of the registry along with the consent letter of the other co-shareholder of the land. Jubaro Bai is the seller in the sale deed and produced the cheque of sale consideration amount along with other relevant documents and due to which applicant was bound to do the registry of the sale- deed done by the Jubaro Bai. He would submit that the applicant has only done the registry with respect of share of the Jubaro bai only and all the documents related to the land is prepared and verified by the Patwari. He would submit that Right of Sub- registrar is very limited because seller apply for the registry through government online portal. He would submit that the allegation with respect to permission from the competent authority is concerned, both seller and purchaser belongs to the Schedule tribe community due to which permission under Chhattisgarh land revenue is not required. He would submit that the complainant has made the complaint before the S.D.O.(Revenue) Rajpur that co-accused's along with Revenue inspector has committed the fraud and fraudulently executed the registry and in the complaint before S.D.O. there is not a single allegations have been made against the present applicant by the complainant. He would submit that there is 5 months delay in filing the FIR and without any explanation of delay. He would submit that the applicant has been suspended from service in pursuance of the present FIR 4 Therefore, he submits that the present applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the non - applicant/State, opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering the fact that present applicant who is a Sub Registrar has been suspended from service in pursuance of the present FIR, without further commenting anything on merits and the fact that investigation and trial are likely to take time, this Court finds it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Yashwant Kumar, 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) 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 him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will 5 be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicant 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) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice gouri