1 2025:CGHC:34578 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1060 of 2025 • Smt. Gudliba Tigga W/o Shri Aathnas Tigga Aged About 63 Years R/o - Beechpara, Phundurdihari Police Station - Ambikapur Dehat, (Gandhi Nagar), District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gandhi Nagar Ambikapur, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Amit Kumar Chaki, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21/07/2025 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 her arrest in connection with Crime No.432/2024 registered at Police Station – Gandhi Nagar, District- Ambikapur, Surguja for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) of IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, a retired Assistant Conservator of Forests, lodged a written report at the concerned Police Station alleging that his son and daughter, though VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.07.25 10:16:44 +0530 2 educated, were unemployed. The accused Praveen Kumar Tigga is the son of a bank officer Mr. Athanas Tigga his neighbour. It is alleged that the present applicant informed the complainant that Praveen Kumar Tigga had been selected in the UPSC examination and appointed as an Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer. This information was further corroborated by certain publications in local newspapers and was also affirmed by the co-accused, whose are the in-laws of the Praveen Kumar Tigga. On the basis of such representations and assurances extended by the present applicant and the co-accused, the complainant parted with a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- in favour of the accused Praveen Kumar Tigga. Further, under the pretext of securing employment for his son, Nilesh Ekka, and daughter, Rosan Ekka, in Indian Oil Corporation as Junior Officers, the accused persons allegedly cheated the complainant and his family to the tune of Rs. 1,79,39,682/-. Upon discovering the fraudulent conduct and deceitful intentions of the accused persons, the complainant lodged a detailed written complaint before the jurisdictional Police Station. On the basis of the above complaint of the complainant, a case was registered at Gandhinagar Police Station, District Surguja, against the applicant/accused and others under Section 420 of the IPC. Applicant apprehending her arrest in connection with aforementioned crime, preferred an application under Section 482 of BNSS before the learned Court below for grant of anticipatory bail, which came to be rejected vide order dated 11.06.2025, hence, necessity has arisen to file instant bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in the present case. He 3 would submit that applicant is a mother of the co-accused namely Praveen Kumar Tigga, who was involved in taking money for providing job to complainant’s son and daughter on the pretext that he is IAS Officer and his in-laws namely Fuljns Toppo and Smt. Nirmala Toppo also involved in the present case and their bail application MCRCA No.657 of 2025 and MCRCA No.650 of 2025 have also been rejected on 07.05.2025 and 05.05.2025. It is also submits by the learned counsel for the applicant submits that she was also lodged a complaint against own son namely Praveen Kumar Tigga and copy of the same annexed herein as Annexure -A/2. He would submit that applicant’s son also tried to sale out the land of the applicant, Further the present case is totally different of other two co- accused and there is no criminal case pending against the applicant and investigation and trial are likely to take time, therefore, he submits that the present applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel 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, gravity of offence, also considering the fact that the present case is totally different of other two co-accused persons who was in-laws of the Praveen Kumar Tigga and the fact that no money has been recovered from the present applicant, who is the mother of the co-accused namely Praveen Kumar Tigga, who has also made a complaint against her son before the police of his misdeeds, investigation and trial are likely 4 to take time, therefore, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 7. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Gulibha Tigga, 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 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 vaishali