1 2025:CGHC:56391 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1826 of 2025 • Abhishek Saraf S/o Late Ganesh Ram Saraf Aged About 40 Years R/o Ward No. 7, Marari Mohalla Balaghat (M.P.) ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Civil Line, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer For Objector Mr. Vikram Dixit, Advocate Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19/11/2025 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 408/2025 registered at Police Station – Civil Line, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that that as per the complainant S.K. Dewangan submitted a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Raipur, that applicant had entered into an agreement with the complainant on 29.07.2019 to sell Khasra No. 136, measuring VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.11.20 16:59:19 +0530 2 15.49 acres, located in Mouza P.H. No. 57, Tehsil and District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, at the rate of Rs. 42 lakh per acre. The seller AbhishekSaraf (applicant) was to receive a total amount of Rs. 6 crore 51 lakh from the buyer (complainant). By 20.06.2025, the seller (applicant) had received a total amount of Rs. 3.50 crore in cash and through other means. Within about 6 years of the deal, through mutual negotiations and by mutual consent, the applicant reached an agreement with one Rajkumar Bhure to settle the civil case, in which Rajkumar Bhure was to be paid. The seller (applicant), the compromiser Rajkumar Bhure and the buyer S.K. Devangan (complainant), that he is not in favor of taking money from and giving him the land. The complainant came to know that applicant had already taken a token money to sell the agreed land to another person namely Jyoti Shah and had deliberately committed fraud to deceive the complainant. On the basis of the applicant's written complaint, FIR has been registered against the applicant. Hence, this application. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that there is no evidence against the present applicant which shows that the applicant has committed the alleged offence. He further submits that the sale agreement for the applicant’s bearing Khasra No.136 area 15.49 P.C. No.57 situated at Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) dated 29.07.2019, which is executed between the applicant and Rakesh Kumar Bhungutwar and others is been cancelled. He also submits that one agreement executed between the applicant with complainant on 20.06.2025 and as per the complaint of the complainant received Rs.51 Lakhs by cheque, which has been 3 return back by RTGS to the complainant on 08.07.2025 for the reason of terms and condition of the agreement dated 20.06.2025 is been not complied by the complainant. He also submits that one crime No.636 of 2019 registered against the applicant by police station Raipur complainant Rajkumar Bhure also filed civil suit against the applicant which has been withdrawn and in the crime No. 636 of 2019 applicant is on bail and in crime No.89 of 2022 registered by the police station Gol Bazar, which is also pending. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the Objector opposes the bail application and submits that applicant has two previous criminal antecedent of similar nature the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, at this stage without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Abhishek Saraf on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to 4 dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The Applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicant 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 alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicant shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali