1 2025:CGHC:37346 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1145 of 2025 1 - Nanak Bansal S/o Sagarmal Bansal, Aged About 51 Years (Aadhar No. 5171 7279 6268) R/o- House No. 1165, Gurushree Villa, Ward No. 04, Near Mahindra Showroom, Dhimrapur Chowk, Raigarh, Tahsil And District - Raigarh (C.G.) 2 - Mukesh Bansal, S/o Sagarmal Bansal, Aged About 40 Years (Aadhar No. 6522 8569 0147) R/o- House No. 1165, Gurushree Villa, Ward No. 04, Near Mahindra Showroom, Dhimrapur Chowk, Raigarh, Tahsil And District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Baradwar, Revenue District - Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. B.P. Sharma along with Mr. Hari Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Dr. Sourabh Kumar Pandey, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 30/07/2025 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the MADHURIMA THAKUR Digitally signed by MADHURIMA THAKUR Date: 2025.07.31 18:04:20 +0530 2 applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 190/2025 registered at Police Station – Baradwar, Revenue District- Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of IPC. 2. As per the prosecution story in brief is that vide written complaint dated 18.07.2025, the complainants namely Nimesh Pratap Singh, Rajiv Lochan Shukla, Kamalnarayan Sahu, Rajendra Kumar Agrawal, Abhishek Das, filed a report stating therein as under:- (a) The applicants herein entered into an agreement to sale of land situated at Village-Chitapandariya, Khasra No. 30/4 & 30/5, total admeasuring 10.032 hectares= 17.55 acre for the purpose of mining activities. (b) However, after leaving 50 meter of land from the side of river, the land suitable for mining is coming out to be only 12.50 acres. (c) Further, over some portion of land, there is possession of another farmers and at the time of agreement, it was stated that passage would also be granted but now one Raghubir Singh Sisodiya & Madhusudan Sisodiya are telling that they would not grant passage over their private land. (d) On 10.04.2024, an advance/earnest money of Rs. 1 crore (in cash) was handed over to applicants, since then the applicants developed mala fide intent and they developed an intent to not execute the sale deed. (e) As on date, a total of sum of Rs. 11 crore (in cash) has been 3 handed over to the applicants and talks of executing a sale deed is going on but now the complainants have gained information that the applicants have also entered into agreement to sale the aforesaid land with someone else. (f) As such, the applicants have acted contrary to terms of agreement to sale and fraudulently obtained the advance consideration. (g) Accordingly, on the aforesaid written complaint dated 18.07.2025, FIR being Crime No. 190/2025 was registered against the accused/applicant herein for offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of BNS, 2023. Thereafter, the applicant herein came to know that the police authorities are trying to arrest the applicant herein in aforesaid crime number, as such, the applicant has preferred anticipatory bail before the Court below and vide order dated 22.07.2025, the Court below was pleased to reject the application of the applicant herein, hence this Anticipatory bail application. 3. The learned counsel for the applicants argued that the applicants are completely innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that the applicants have no criminal background and therefore, it is respectfully submitted that the entire prosecution is false and concocted. He would further submits that the act of registering three back to back offenses on the very same day (after the filing of writ petition) would clearly show the false implication and teaching of a lesson to the 4 petitioners to approaching the Courts of Law. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that this anticipatory bail application is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature and allegation of the offence leveled against the applicants, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicants. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants – Nanak Bansal and Mukesh Bansal, on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The applicants 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 applicants shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicants shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the 5 said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicants and the surety shall submit a copy of their 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 applicants shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Madhurima