1 2025:CGHC:49834 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5376 of 2025 Bahadur Singh Meravi S/o Sukkal Singh Meravi Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village- Anjana, Police Station - Jhalmala, Tahsil - Rengakharkala, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Kawardha, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 07.10.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 214/2025, registered at Police Station – Kawardha, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506-B of the Indian Penal Code (for short, IPC). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that on 15.05.2025, the complainant Mukesh Markam lodged a report that he is working as Secrete Soldier RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 and during his work, one Suresh Manikpuri took him to the present applicant who was working in District Executive Force i.e. Police Department. The applicant disclosed the complainant that he has contact with higher authorities in Police Headquarter and he demanded Rs. 5,60,000/- from the complainant for their promotion due to grace of higher authorities and received a sum of Rs. 5,60,000/- from the complainant Mukesh Markam. Applicant told them by telephonic message that both the victims have been promoted to the post of constable and such order was sent in whatsapp number but subsequently it was deleted. Applicant sent a copy of order for medical check-up was sent to the whatsapp number of Suresh Manikpuri and also told to go for basic training in Raipur after getting uniform. On inquiry regarding appointment order, the applicant told that the order has been cancelled. The complainant asked for refunding the amount to him then the applicant threatened them that he will cause death by gun shot. Applicant has received amount of Rs. 5,60,000/- from Mukesh and Rs. 2,60,000/- from Suresh Manikpuri thus total sum of Rs. 8,20,000/- was received by the applicant from the complainant. On the basis of report lodged by the complainant, the Police registered an offence. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there is only one criminal antecedent registered against the present applicant. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 15.06.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there is one criminal antecedent registered 3 against the present applicant, and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that the applicant has received amount of Rs. 5,60,000/- from Mukesh Markam and Rs. 2,60,000/- from Suresh Manikpuri, thus, total sum of Rs. 8,20,000/- was received by the applicant from the complainant on the pretext of making their promotion to the post of Constable, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there is only one criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 15.06.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Bahadur Singh Meravi, involved in Crime No. 214/2025, registered at Police Station – Kawardha, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506-B of the IPC, 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 4 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 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar