1 2025:CGHC:27034 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 889 of 2025 1 - Haradhan Mandal S/o Shri Ganesh Mandal Aged About 50 Years R/o Sector-4, Street-23, Quarter No.-11, Bhilai, Tehsil And District - Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - P.S. - D.D. Nagar, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Akash Kumar Kundu, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23.06.2025 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 394/2024 registered at Police Station – D.D.Nagar District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 of IPC. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, the complainant has alleged that the present applicant had lured him into getting a tender for Survey and took an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- from the complainant. After starting the tender work the applicant denied to pay the amount for the work done has committed cheating by not returning the money. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.06.25 11:10:12 +0530 2 applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant is that complainant in the present matter has entered into an agreement with ROPTS Private Ltd for Biomass Energy Survey which defined the scope of work among other terms and conditions. He also submits that since the survey work done by the complainant and its organization were found to be erroneous which finally culminated into civil dispute between the ROPTS Private Ltd. and the complainant, legal notice invoking arbitration clause as per the contract were sent by ROPTS Private Ltd. to the complainant. That ROPTS Private Ltd. had also sent legal notice of defamation against the present complainant and it was after these circumstances the complainant had registered the FIR against the present applicant. He also submits that applicant has never been of a nature of threatening others and there is absolutely no chance of him tampering the witnesses. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the State would oppose the bail application of the applicant and submits that looking to the conduct of the applicant, he is not entitled 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 and nature of dispute and material available in case diary, it appears that applicant is neither beneficiary nor has anything to do with the case as the Contract was executed between the complainant and Company. Therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 3 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Haradhan Mandal, 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 vaishali