1 2025:CGHC:49920 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6112 of 2025 Smt. Sarswati Gupta W/o Late Moti Lal Gupta Aged About 57 Years Occupation- Service (Teacher) R/o Village- Kanjiya, P.S. And Tehsil- Kusmi, District- Balrampur, Ramanujganj (C.G) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Kusmi District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant MCRC No. 7341 of 2025 Ambikesh Gupta S/o Late Moti Lal Gupta Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Kanjiya, P.S. And Tehsil- Kusmi, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, C.G. ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kusmi, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. --- Non-Applicant MCRC No. 7278 of 2025 Bihari Kujur S/o Late Lohra Ram Aged About 58 Years Works As - Patwari, R/o Village- Ram Nagar, P.S. And Tahsil- Kusumi, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.10.08 13:55:30 +0530 2 State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station - Kusumi, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant For Applicants (MCRC Nos. 6112/2025 and 7341/2025) : Mr. Sunil Tripathi, Advocate. For Applicant (MCRC No. 7278/2025) Mr. Amarnath Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07/10/2025 1. Since the above-mentioned three bail applications arise out of same crime number, they are clubbed and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 61/2025 registered at Police Station Kusumi, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B), 34 of Indian Penal Code. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, based on a letter issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Kusmi, the Tehsildar, Kusmi, directed the Station House Officer, Kusmi, to register an FIR against the applicants. It is alleged that in the year 2013, the applicants fraudulently obtained an order from the Sub-Divisional Officer and got land bearing Khasra No. 536/05, measuring 3 dismil and belonging to a member of the aboriginal tribe, illegally transferred in their name. Pursuant to this, the applicants were arrested. Hence, 3 this bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. They further submitted that the applicants humbly submits that on 18.08.2023, the previous tribal landowner, Rijhan, submitted an application before the Collector and the Station House Officer, Kusmi, wherein he stated in an affidavit that he has been duly compensated for the aforesaid land bearing Khasra No. 536/05, admeasuring 0.012 hectare. He further affirmed that the allegation against the present applicants Smt. Saraswati Gupta and her son regarding fraudulent acquisition of the said land is false. He further submits that on 25.06.2024, the original complainant, Basant Khujur, submitted a letter to the Collector, Balrampur, stating that he does not wish to pursue his complaint against the applicants, which is presently pending before the learned Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue). Learned counsel for the applicant, namely, Bihari Kujur submits that the allegations levelled against the present applicant are baseless, as the applicant merely performed the duties entrusted to him in his official capacity by making an entry in the B-1 land record for the year 2013–14, at Serial No. 377 of Village Kanjia, Tehsil Kusmi, inserting the name of the applicant, Smt. Saraswati Gupta, for land bearing Khasra No. 536/5, area 0.012 hectares. This action was carried out in compliance with the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Kusmi, in Revenue Case No. /16/A-23/2012–13, dated 19.12.2013. Further, the present applicants have no criminal antecedents, they are said to be in jail since 19.07.2025. Thus, 4 looking to the above, it is prayed that the applicants may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the non-applicant/State opposes the bail application and submits that that the charge-sheet has not been filed in the present case. He further submits that according to the case diary, the material collected so far indicates that the applicants/accused, in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy, dishonestly tampered with and forged revenue records, thereby committing an unlawful act, hence, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, allegations levelled against the applicants and the fact that the applicants have no previous criminal antecedents and further, the charge-sheet has not been filed and they are said to be in jail since 19.07.2025, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicants - Smt. Sarswati Gupta (in MCRC No. 6112/2025), Ambikesh Gupta (in MCRC No. 7341/2025) and Bihari Kujur (in MCRC No. 7278/2025) involved in Crime No. 61/2025 registered at Police Station Kusumi, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B), 34 of Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the 5 satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail 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 him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 6 proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti