1 2025:CGHC:50916 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6960 of 2025 Dilip Ram S/o Devesh Ram Aged About 28 Years Caste - Gond, R/o Village Khuntitoli (Gali Mohalla Bandipa Para), Police Station And Tahsil - Duldula, District Jashpur C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kunkuri, District Jashpur C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Jitendra Kumar Saxena, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Bharat Gulabani, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13/10/2025 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.144/2025 registered at Police Station Kunkuri, District-Jashpur GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.10.13 19:18:39 +0530 2 (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC (as per FIR). 2. As per the prosecution, the complainant Smt. Goreti Minj lodged a report on 17.07.2025 at Police Station Kunkuri, alleging that the applicant executed an agreement to sell land bearing Khasra No. 345/1, area 12 dismil, situated near Village Bemtatoli–Saliyatoli National Highway, for a consideration of Rs.36,00,000/-. The complainant paid Rs.1,00,000/- as advance, followed by Rs.2,50,000/- for the applicant’s sister’s marriage, and later Rs.4,00,000/- to broker Goverdhan Yadav at the time of execution of the sale deed on 20.06.2023. Subsequently, Rs.19,00,000/- was paid through RTGS and Rs.10,00,000/- in cash to another broker, Neeraj Prajapati. When the complainant applied for mutation, she discovered that the land sold (Khasra No. 345/14) had already been acquired by the government for the Bharatmala Project, and not the land agreed upon (Khasra No. 345/1). It is alleged that the applicant, in conspiracy with others, deceitfully executed a sale deed for government-acquired land and cheated the complainant of the sale consideration. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to a civil dispute arising out of a land transaction and the applicant belongs to a Scheduled Tribe community and is a less-educated villager. He would submit that as per the FIR itself, the applicant had received only Rs.3,50,000/- from the complainant, which he has already returned Rs.3,00,000/- and Rs.60,000/- respectively through cheques drawn on HDFC Bank. He would submit that major amount of Rs.19,00,000/- by 3 RTGS and Rs.10,00,000/- in cash was paid by the complainant to land broker Neeraj Prajapati, not to the applicant. Hence, the applicant cannot be held liable for any alleged cheating in respect of the said amount. He would submit that the complainant’s subsequent application for compensation of Rs.21,09,524/- for the government- acquired land (Khasra No. 345/14) was rejected by the S.D.O., which prompted the filing of a false report after two years of the sale transaction. He would submit that the applicant never intended to cheat or defraud the complainant; the dispute, if any, is purely civil in nature. He would further submit that co-accused persons, namely Goverdhan Yadav and Ghanshyam Yadav, have already been granted bail by the learned court below. He would submit that the charge sheet has been filed in this case, the applicant is in jail since 18/07/2025 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and he would submit that charge sheet has been filed in this case before the competent court and the applicant has no criminal antecedents. 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 of allegation levelled against the applicant, considering the fact that dispute appears to be civil in nature, period of detention of the applicant since 18/07/2025, charge sheet has been filed, applicant has no criminal antecedents and also considering the fact that trial is likely 4 to take some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the Applicant- Dilip Ram, involved in Crime No.144/2025 registered at Police Station Kunkuri, District-Jashpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC (as per FIR), 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 sufficient 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, 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 5 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 him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri