1 2025:CGHC:467 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1488 of 2024 Nirmesh Bhojwani S/o Late Omprakash Bhiwani Aged About 27 Years R/o Bijlipara, Charama, Police Station And Tehsil- Charama, District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Charama, Tehsil- Charama, District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant For Applicant :Mr. Manoj Paranjpe along with Mr. Ishan Verma, Advocate For Non-applicant/State :Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.01.2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 137/2024 registered at Police Station – Charama, District- Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 120(B) and read with Section 34 of IPC. 2 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that, the complaint lodged by the complainant, Bhesu Kumar Dhankar, at Police Station Charama against one of the co-accused, Narendra Sinha, alleging that co- accused, Narendra Sinha deceived him by luring him into fraudulent schemes. The accused allegedly financed two motorcycles in the complainant's name, from different finance companies. Subsequently, the accused took possession of the financed motorcycles and sold them to third parties without the complainant's knowledge or consent. On the basis of this complaint, Police Station Charama registered a First Information Report (FIR) under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against Narendra Sinha and commenced the investigation. During the investigation, the police apprehended accused Narendra Sinha and another accused, Gopendra Pal. Their memorandum statements were recorded, in which they purportedly confessed to committing the fraud in collaboration with the applicant, Nirmesh Bhojwani, and other co- accused. According to their statements, the accused conspired to procure vehicles on finance and then handed over these vehicles to their acquaintances. They misled their acquaintances by claiming financial difÏculty and assured them that the vehicle owner would continue paying the loan installments. In exchange, the acquaintances provided a lump sum amount at a reduced price and retained possession of the vehicles. This fraudulent practice caused significant financial losses to both the complainant and the financial institutions involved. After completing the investigation, Police 3 Station Charama filed the charge sheet before the subordinate trial Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submit that the allegations against the applicant are vague and lack specificity in terms of the applicant's direct involvement in the commission of the alleged fraud. There is no evidence to show that the applicant personally engaged in financing the motorcycles or took possession of them. They further submits that the applicant is in no manner associated with the accused, Narendra Sinha, apart from his approaching the applicant for the purpose of obtaining financial assistance for the purchase of various bikes/ two-wheelers. The applicant operates as a financier, providing loans for such purposes, and any interaction with the accused was strictly professional and limited to the financing of the said vehicles. There exists no personal or other business relationship between the applicant and the accused beyond the stated financial transactions and the applicant has no prior criminal antecedents and is not a habitual offender. This demonstrates his good conduct and lack of propensity to commit such offences. The First Information Report (FIR) was lodged after an inordinate and unexplained delay, which casts serious doubt on the veracity of the allegations. The delayed lodging of the FIR suggests that it is an afterthought, fabricated to falsely implicate the applicant. It is well settled that unexplained delay in filing the FIR creates suspicion regarding the authenticity of the case, and in the present matter, the same holds true, thereby rendering the allegations unreliable. The evidence in the present case is 4 insufÏcient to establish that the applicant has committed the alleged offences. Accordingly, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the non- applicant/State opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant and submits the fact that the observation of the case diary, it reveals that the applicant, along with other co-accused, formed a gang and committed a pre-planned fraud on the complainant and the general public. They lured people into financing new vehicles at lower prices and then sold those vehicles to their acquaintances at lower prices, thereby indulging in the mischief of approximately 35-40 vehicles. Also considering the fact that the applicant has four criminal antecedents which were registered under three-four days and have yet to be listed. Considering the seriousness of the offence committed by the applicant along with co-accused, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and nature of dispute and material available in case diary and further the fact that the evidence in the present case is insufficient to establish that the applicant has committed the alleged offences, the main allegation levelled against the co-accused namely Narendra Sinha and also there is 5 an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR which has been unexplained and further the applicant has already been granted ad-interim anticipatory bail by this Court on 20.12.2024 therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, this Court find it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant- Nirmesh Bhojwani, on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on the following conditions:- (a) He 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) He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicant 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) He shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal