1 2025:CGHC:33490 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5559 of 2025 Javed Khan S/o Riyaz Khan Aged About 31 Years R/o Railway House, Shanshkritik Niketan Titali Chowk Police Station - Torwa Tehsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Torwa District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Hemant Kumar Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Dr. Saurabh K. Pande, Deputy Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 16.07.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 355/2025, registered at Police Station Torwa District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant, Deepak Rajput, submitted a written complaint at the Police Station stating RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 that the applicant assured him of securing a government job and, on that assurance, took an amount of Rs. 5 lakh in cash in the presence of Pratap Rajput, Suraj Rajput, Anish Rajput, Deepak Gupta, and Jagmit Khalsha. It is further alleged that the applicant cheated approximately 40 persons and collected a total of around Rs. 80 lakh from them on the false promise of providing government jobs. The applicant was arrested on 03.04.2025, and a final report has been submitted under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the FIR was lodged on 02.04.2025 with an unexplained delay of over 3½ years from the alleged first incident dated 20.10.2021. He further submits that the applicant never promised any government job nor took Rs. 5 lakh or any amount from the complainant. He further argued that the main prosecution witness, Anish Rajput, is the mastermind behind the false allegations and is closely related to other witnesses. The applicant had borrowed Rs. 2 lakh from Anish Rajput and Rs. 80,000/- from Mukesh Shrivas due to financial hardship, which led to harassment by them and forceful collection of blank and undated cheques from the applicant, his wife, and his mother. Anish Rajput even took 7 cheques worth Rs. 79 lakhs under threat and later refused to return them. When the applicant warned of legal action, a false FIR was lodged in conspiracy with others. Further, several alleged victims named in the prosecution story residents of Bemetara, Durg, Raipur, and Baloda Bazar have not been included as witnesses in the final 3 report, which further casts doubt on the prosecution’s case. He also submits that the dispute appears to be of a civil nature but has been maliciously given a criminal color. He further submits that the applicant has been in jail since 03.04.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant is involved in a serious economic offence, having cheated around 40 persons of approximately Rs. 80 lakhs on the false pretext of providing government jobs, including Rs. 5 lakhs taken from the complainant Deepak Rajput. He further submits that the allegations are supported by multiple witnesses, and the applicant’s conduct reflects a well-planned criminal conspiracy, not a mere civil dispute as claimed. The theory of friendly loan and cheque recovery is an afterthought and raises serious questions to be examined during trial, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the fact that the applicant is involved in a serious economic offence, having cheated around 40 persons of approximately Rs. 80 lakhs on the false pretext of providing government jobs, including Rs. 5 lakhs 4 taken from the complainant Deepak Rajput. Further the allegations are supported by multiple witnesses, and the applicant’s conduct reflects a well-planned criminal conspiracy, not a mere civil dispute as claimed, the theory of friendly loan and cheque recovery is an afterthought and raises serious questions to be examined during trial, as such, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Javed Khan, involved in Crime No. 355/2025, registered at Police Station Torwa District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan