-1 / 5 2025:CGHC:48396 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6198 of 2025 Divyansh Singh S/o Anil Singh Aged About 25 Years R/o Vill. Korra Kanjas, Distt. Pratapgarh, U.P., Now Permanend R/o- A/01, Sai Villa Bhatgaon P.S. Purani Basti Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Purani Basti, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. S.C. Verma Senior Advocate along with Mr. Sajal Kumar Gupta & Mr. Manharan Lal Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.09.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 230/2025 registered at Police Station – Purani Basti, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 308(2), 111(1) BNS and Section 4 of the C.G. Protection of Debtors Act 1937. 2. As per the prosecution case, in brief, in connection with Crime No. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.09.19 18:38:37 +0530 -2 / 5 332/2025 registered at Police Station Telibandha, Raipur, the police raided the residence of absconding accused Rohit Singh Tomar for offences under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. Upon non-cooperation from his family members, a search warrant was obtained, and during the search conducted on 03.06.2025, various incriminating items such as property documents, signed blank cheques, and stamp papers were seized. The matter was thereafter referred to Police Station Purani Basti for further investigation. Subsequently, the statements of victims revealed that Rohit Tomar, along with Virendra and Divyansh Tomar, was running an illegal money-lending racket, compelling borrowers to sign blank documents and threatening them to recover exorbitant interest. Victims were also coerced into transferring land at undervalued rates. Interest payments were routed through the accounts of their associates and family members. On this basis, a fresh FIR was registered under Sections 308(2) and 111(1) of the BNS, 2023, and Section 4 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Debtors Act, 1937 against the applicant and other co-accused persons, namely, Shubhra Singh Tomar, Banti Sahare, Jitendra Dewangan, and Bhavna Tomar. It is further stated that FIR No. 230/2025, registered at Police Station Purani Basti, District Raipur, C.G., under the aforesaid provisions, has been marked as 'sensitive,' and a copy of the same has not been supplied to the applicant. The applicant was arrested by Police Station Purani Basti, District Raipur, C.G., on 05.06.2025 for the alleged offences punishable under Section 308(2) and 111(1) of the BNS, 2023, and Section 4 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Debtors Act, 1937. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been -3 / 5 falsely implicated in the instant case and has not committed any offence as alleged. The applicant, along with two co-accused Rohit Singh Tomar and Virendra Tomar, is named in the FIR, whereas the other co-accused persons have already been granted bail. It is further submitted that in another case registered against the applicant, being Crime No. 231/2025 for a similar offence, he was granted bail by the learned Special Judge, Raipur on 27.06.2025, and a copy of the said order is annexed herewith. Learned counsel further submits that the present is the first bail application of the applicant, who is a 25-year-old student of law and has been in custody since 05.06.2025. The police, with malafide intention, have arrested him merely because he is a family member of the absconding accused Rohit Tomar and Virendra Tomar. The applicant possesses a valid Money Lender’s Licence issued by the competent authority, and therefore the allegation under Section 4 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Debtors Act, 1937 is wholly misconceived. There is no direct evidence on record against the applicant, and the only circumstance relied upon by the prosecution is his familial relationship with the co-accused. The applicant has been falsely implicated only to harass him and his family members and to exert pressure on the absconding accused. It is also submitted that the other co-accused, namely Shubhra Singh Tomar, Banti Sahare, Jitendra Dewangan, and Bhavna Tomar, have already been granted bail by the learned Special Judge (CBI), Raipur. The charge-sheet has not yet been filed, and there is no likelihood of the applicant interfering with the investigation. The applicant is a permanent resident of Raipur, is ready to furnish adequate surety, and undertakes to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court. Therefore, he -4 / 5 prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant him regular bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by the trial Court, further considering that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court, and that the applicant has been in custody since 05.06.2025, and as the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant – Divyansh Singh, involved in Crime No. 230/2025 registered at Police Station – Purani Basti, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 308(2), 111(1) BNS and Section 4 of the C.G. Protection of Debtors Act 1937, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail -5 / 5 during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav