1 2025:CGHC:50349 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7968 of 2025 Anuj Kumar Mishra S/o Shri Ashok Mishra Aged About 35 Years R/o Rajkishore Nagar, Lingiyadih, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Sarkanda, Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Aditya Dhar Diwan, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Gulabani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09/10/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 934/2025 registered at Police Station Sarkanda, Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Sections 318, 338, 336(3), 340, 3(5), 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Prakash Dubey is the owner of ancestral land situated at village Khamtarai, P.H. No. 25, Khasra No. 672, admeasuring 56 decimals, duly recorded in the revenue records. It is alleged that co-accused Bhaiyyalal, with the intention of obtaining illegal financial gain, prepared forged documents and, by impersonating the complainant’s late father, Bhaiyyalal Dubey, got the said land fraudulently registered in his name on 04.02.2025. On the basis of this incident, Crime No. 934/2025 has been registered against the accused persons under Sections 318, 338, 336(3), 340, 61(2), and 3(5) of the B.N.S. 2023. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case, though he has neither committed any act of fraud or forgery nor obtained any amount from the complainant. In fact, the applicant is himself a bonafide purchaser of the land in question, having paid the entire sale consideration through cheques and RTGS. Upon learning that he had been deceived, the applicant retrieved the cheques from the broker, Priyanshu Mishra, and immediately approached the revenue authorities for mutation. It was then revealed that he had become a victim of criminal fraud committed by co-accused Bhaiyyalal Suryavanshi, who impersonated the complainant’s late father. The alleged forgery is solely attributable to the co-accused, and the applicant had no role in preparing or executing the forged 3 documents. He also submits that the co-accused, namely, Abhishek Dubey, who was the witness of the sale deed has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 22.08.2025 in MCRCA No.1279 of 2025. The applicant is in jail since 07.07.2025, the applicant has two criminal antecedents of the years 2013 and 2007 under the IPC, further charge-sheet has been filed 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. He further submits that the applicant, in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy with co-accused Bhaiyyalal, purchased the land in question that had been fraudulently registered through impersonation and forged documents, thereby deriving benefit from the illegal transaction. He also submits that the applicant knowingly participated in the transaction based on forged documents to give legitimacy to the fraudulent transfer of the complainant’s ancestral property, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 07.07.2025, the fact that thought the applicant, in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy with co-accused Bhaiyyalal, purchased the land in question that had been fraudulently registered through impersonation and forged documents, thereby deriving benefit from 4 the illegal transaction, but considering the fact that co-accused, namely, Abhishek Dubey, who was the witness of the sale deed has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 22.08.2025 in MCRCA No.1279 of 2025, also considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant and the fact that charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Anuj Kumar Mishra, involved in Crime No. 934/2025 registered at Police Station Sarkanda, Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318, 338, 336(3), 340, 3(5), 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two 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 he 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, 5 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 him, 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 sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil