1 2025:CGHC:28157 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 911 of 2025 Aashish Bajpai S/o Late Shri Ramprasad Aged About 44 Years R/o Vill- Gatadih, P.S. - Sarsiwa, Dist- Sarangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station- Sarsiwa, Dist- Sarangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Syed Ishhadil Ali, Advocate For Res/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 26/06/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this first application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 168 of 2025, registered at Police Station Sarsiwa District- Sarangarh, Bilaigarh, (CG), for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 120B, 34 of IPC. 2 2. According to the prosecution's story, on the basis of the complaint made by Amitabh Bajpai and Ashutosh Bajpai, the police of Police Station Sarsiwa District- Sarangarh registered an offence against the present applicant and also against another co-accused namely Prem Sidar. In the said complaint, it is stated that the present applicant alongwith other co-accused registered the land of one Ramdas in his name by showing Prem Sidar as Ramdas, but applicant denied all the allegation levelled against him. Hence this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He would also submit that the complainant is the cousin brother of the present applicant and there is property dispute between the applicant and the father of the complainant so to make pressure upon the applicant, the said complaint has been lodged by him. He would also submit that the applicant is a bonafide purchaser and any kind of fraud has not been committed by the present applicant. He would further submit that investigation is going on and it is likely to take some time, therefore he prays to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and would submit that the sale deed has been executed but the the original copy has been given for mutation before the concerned Tahshildar and it is the part of the case diary. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the present applicant and also considering the fact that though it has been claimed by the present applicant that he is a bonafide purchaser of the property in question however, on a pointed query being made by this Court to the learned counsel for the applicant as to whether he has executed the sale deed, he stated that the same has been executed but the original copy is submitted for mutation before the concerned Tahshildar and he has not a copy of the same. Further on a query being made by this Court as to what was the sale consideration and how it has been paid, it is stated by the State counsel that the sale consideration is of Rs. 4 Lakhs and and it has been paid through cash, therefore, the matter needs to be investigated thoroughly / properly, therefore, in these circumstances, I am not inclined to entertain the instant anticipatory bail application at this stage. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail of the applicant –Aashish Bajpai involved in Crime No. 168 of 2025, registered at Police Station Sarsiwa District- Sarangarh, Bilaigarh, (CG), for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 120B, 34 of IPC, is rejected. S Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice amita AMITA DUBEY Digitally signed by AMITA DUBEY Date: 2025.07.01 11:42:04 +0530