1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 986 of 2025 • Mohit Ram Netam S/o Shri Ajit Ram Netam Aged About 60 Years R/o Jailpara Road Near Mangal Bhavan Surajpur Distt- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Surajpur Distt. Surajpur (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Lavkush Kumar Sahu, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.07.2025 1. This is the Second bail application of the applicant under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.235/2025, registered at Police Station – Surajpur, for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of IPC. 2. The first bail application filed by the applicant was rejected by this Court in MCRA No.777 of 2025 vide order dated 27.05.2025. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA 2 3. Prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant Murli Manohar has lodged written report against the applicant that being convinced repeatedly by the applicant, he went to Mohit Netam and Hemant Netam's house along with Rajendra Sonwani, Khilanand Thakur and Pushpendra Kushwaha and given Rs.5 lakhs in cash on 12.11.2022 and after few days on 01.02.2023 again given Rs.2 Lakhs through cheque, thereafter, he suspected that he has been trapped in a fraud, he demanded the money from Hemant Netam who is represented as a guarantee then Hemant Netam has given him a cheque of Rs.7 lakhs bearing number 511061 of his account in State Bank of India, thereafter when the complainant name is not appeared in the selection list of Sub Inspector, he has made communication through mobile to the Hemant Netam and Mohit Netam then they told him that the complainant whould not worry because he would get selection in the post of Constable but this time the complainant said that now he does not want the job and requested to return his money upon which in the month of October 2024 Hemant Netam has returned Rs.50,000/- to the complainant and assured that rest of the money will be given after few days but later Hemant Netam has not returned the rest of the money to the complainant thereafter police has registered the case against the present applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the IPC. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. His son has taken the alleged amount from the complainant and he is posted in PHE Department. He further submits that in the month of October, 2024, a sum of Rs.50,000/- 3 was returned to the complainant and assured to return the rest of the amount within a short period. Therefore, he prays to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant. He further submits that the applicant's son has taken advantage of his father's position and taken bribe of huge amount by cheque and also returned some amount on the part of failure for providing a job of Sub Inspector and adversely kept the money for his own use with malafide motive. Therefore, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that applicant is posted in PHE Department, applicant's son has taken advantage of his father's position and taken bribe of huge amount by cheque and also returned some amount on the part of failure for providing a job of Sub Inspector and adversely kept the money for his own use with malafide motive, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 8. Accordingly, this second bail application of applicant –Mohit Ram Netam involved in 235/2025, registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District- Surajpur for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of IPC., is rejected at this stage. 4 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali