2025:CGHC:4138 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C. (A) No. 122 of 2025 1. Santram Yadav, S/o Late Jagatram Yadav, aged about 42 Years, R/o Suttara, Police Station Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.) 2. Jantram Yadav, S/o Late Jagatram Yadav, aged about 35 Years, R/o Suttara, Police Station Katghora, District- Korba(C.G.) 3. Antram Yadav, S/o Late Jagatram Yadav, aged about 34 Years, R/o Suttara, Police Station Katghora, District- Korba(C.G.) 4. Parmeshwar Yadav, S/o Late Jagatram Yadav, aged about 33 Years, R/o Suttara, Police Station Katghora, District- Korba(C.G.) ---- Applicants Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Katghora, District- Korba(C.G.) 2. Bhagirathi, S/o Late Ful Sai, aged about 47 Years, R/o Suttara, Police Station Katghora, District- Korba(C.G.) ---- Respondents ____________________________________________________________________ For Applicants - Shri S.R.J.Jaiswal, Advocate. For Respondent/State - Shri Ajay Kumar Pandey, Government Advocate. For Complainant - Shri Rajendra Tripathi, Adcovate. ____________________________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 23-01-2025 1. Heard. 2. As the case diary is available, it is heard finally. 3. This is a Second bail application for grant of anticipatory bail filed by the applicants under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sahita, 2023 ASHISH TIWARI Digitally signed by ASHISH TIWARI Date: 2025.01.23 15:24:09 +0530 -2- apprehending their arrest in connection with the Crime No.264/2022 registered at Police Station – Katghora, District – Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of IPC. First application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 16.12.2022 passed by this Court. 4. The Case of the prosecution in brief is that a report was lodged by the complainant against present applicants and others that the property comprised of piece of land i.e. Khasra No.140 at village – Sutarra, Tahsil – Podi Uproda, District – Korba was recorded in the name of their ancestor – Phoolsai Yadav. The present applicants, in connivance with the revenue authorities, got their name mutated in the revenue records and since, the said property was taken into land acquisition scheme of Union of India namely Bharatmala Pariyojana by the National Highways Authority of India, compensation to the tune of Rs.30,77,460/- was obtained by the applicants by committing cheating. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that though the first application was dismissed on merits, however, the compensation amount to the tune of Rs.30,77,460/- which the applicants had received as per the allegation, has already been paid to the complainant, namely, Bhagirathi, and as such the dispute between the complainant and applicants has been compromised and a deed has also been appended with the application for grant of anticipatory bail. Therefore, he submits that the application may be allowed. 6. State Counsel however has opposed the application for anticipatory bail. 7. Shri Tripathi submits that the parties have entered into a compromise, they have settled their dispute amicably and the amount of Rs.30,77,460/- has already been received by the complainant (Bhagirathi). 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. -3- 9. Having considered the fact that since the parties have entered into a compromise and compromise deed has also been appended with this application that the other accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail in M.Cr.C.(A) No. 1495/2024 order dated 09/01/2025 passed by this Court, therefore, I am inclined to allow this anticipatory bail application. 10. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants, they shall be released on bail on their executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting office with the following conditions:- (i) That the applicants shall make themselve available for interrogation before the investigation officer; (ii) that 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) that the applicants shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial Court till disposal of the trial. 11. However, the observations made here-in-above are only for the purpose of deciding this anticipatory bail application and the trial court will decide the case on its own merit without being influenced by any observation made in this order. If any one of conditions is violated by the applicants, the State will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Ashish