1 2025:CGHC:32379 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4962 of 2025 • Rajani Ratanam W/o K. Ratanam Nilesh Aged About 52 Years R/o K.L.C. Khursipar, Police Station - Khursipar, District - Durg Chhattisgarh ... Applicant Versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Supela, Chowki Smriti Nagar, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Hemant Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Pramod Shrivastava and Ms. Shailja Shukla, Deputy Government Advocates Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 11/07/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this second bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sahita, 2023 as she is languishing in jail since 15.02.2025 in connection with Crime No. 572/2023 registered at Police Station – Supela, Chowki Smriti Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) for commission of offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC. 2. The first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 30.04.2025, passed in MCrC No. 2318/2025, however, liberty was granted to the applicant to revive her prayer after filing of charge sheet. 3. The case of the prosecution is that the land bearing Survey No. 3310/07 situate at Village Kohka, Patwari Circle No. 14/19, Tehsil Durg, District Durg was recorded in the name of one Sadhna Devi. One Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2025.07.14 13:07:07 +0530 2 Santosh Khanduja represented the present applicant as Sadhna Devi and a sale deed was executed in his favour on 27.11.2006. FIR was registered against S. Devi, Sadhna Devi and others on 18.07.2023 and charge sheet has been filed on 15.05.2025 and names of Kanhaiya Lal, Sahjaad Khan and the present applicant are added. According to charge sheet Kanhaiya Lal and Sahjaad Khan were attesting witnesses to the sale deed whereas Rajani Ratanam- present applicant represented herself as Sadhna Devi. 4. Mr. Hemant Kumar Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that Kanhaiya Lal and Sahjaad Khan have already been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Court below. He would further contend that the applicant is languishing in jail from 15.02.2025 and she is a lady aged about 52 years, the offence are not grievous and triable by Judicial Magistrate First Class, therefore, the application may be allowed. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Pramod Shrivastava, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the non-applicant would oppose. He would submit that the present applicant is main culprit, who impersonated herself as Sadhna Devi and sale deed was executed in favour of Santosh Khanduja on 27.11.2006. He would further contend that Kanhaiya Lal and Sahjaad Khan were granted anticipatory bail as they were attesting witnesses only. He would submit that the application may be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. The sale deed in favour of Santosh Khanduja was executed on 27.11.2006 pertaining to Survey No. 3310/07 which was recorded in 3 the name of one Sadhna Devi. It is alleged in the FIR that the applicant herein impersonated herself as Sadhna Devi and executed the sale deed. Admittedly FIR was filed after long 16 years; the applicant is a lady aged about 52 years; she is in jail from 15.02.2025; charge sheet has already been filed and the case is exclusively triable by Judicial Magistrate First Class, I am inclined to grant regular to the applicant. Accordingly, this second bail application is allowed. 8. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, she shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- i. she 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/her from disclosing such fact to the Court; ii. she shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; iii. she shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial and iv. she shall not involve herself in any offence of similar nature in future. 9. The observation made in the course of this order is only for considering the case of the applicant on the application for grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced by any observation made in the course of this order. 10. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti