1 2025:CGHC:52599 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8499 of 2025 Prahlad Rathore S/o Shri Bodhan Singh Rathore Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Lalpur Tahsil Pendra Road District Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Ps Gaurela, District Gaurela-Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Raj Kumar Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Smt. Supriya Upasane, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28.10.2025 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 123/2025 registered at Police Station Gaurela, District Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the IPC. AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the basis of a complaint lodged by the complainant Santosh Vishwakarma, an offence was registered at Police Station Gaurela as Crime No. 123/2025 under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused Prahlad Rathore. The complainant alleged that the accused introduced himself as an agent in the share market and assured that any money invested through him would yield a return of 5% to 20% interest. Believing his words, the complainant paid a total amount of ₹1,90,000 to the accused through cash and bank transactions. However, when the complainant did not receive his money back within the promised time, and the accused stopped responding to calls and eventually switched off his phone, the complainant realized he had been cheated. During investigation, it was revealed that the accused had similarly defrauded several other persons and collected a total amount of about ₹54,00,000 from them under the same false pretext. Statements and transaction details of the complainant and other victims were seized and attached to the case diary. The case is still under investigation. Hence the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated 17.07.2025 in MCRC No.4616 of 2025, therefore this second bail application is filed on the ground that a bare perusal of the FIR and the Final Report clearly reveals that none of the ingredients alleged by the complainant are supported by the 3 evidence collected during investigation. The seized bank account records of the applicant do not show any transaction corresponding to the date, time, or amount as claimed by the complainant. He also submits that the investigating agency, without having any credible material or evidence against the applicant, has proceeded to arrest him. The applicant specifically submits that he has neither received any amount from the complainant nor induced the complainant to transfer money to anyone, further charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case and the applicant is in jail since 17.05.2025, hence, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is alleged to have falsely represented himself as a share market agent and, under the pretext of providing 5% to 20% monthly returns, fraudulently collected money from the complainant and several others. In this manner, the applicant allegedly cheated the complainant of ₹1,90,000 and other individuals of a total amount of about ₹54,00,000, so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, three more FIRs have been registered against the applicant as Crime Nos.120/2025, 121/2025 and 122/2025, against which the applicant has preferred bail applications and the said three bail applications were rejected vide order dated 17.07.2025, which shows that the applicant is a habitual offender and his bail application is liable to be rejected. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second bail application of the applicant and first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 17.07.2025 in MCRC No. 4616 of 2025 on the ground that the applicant allegedly falsely represented himself as a share market agent and, under the pretext of providing 5% to 20% monthly returns, fraudulently collected money from the complainant and several others and in that manner, the applicant cheated the complainant of ₹1,90,000 and other individuals of a total amount of about ₹54,00,000. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, three more FIRs have been registered against the applicant as Crime Nos.120/2025, 121/2025 and 122/2025, against which the applicant has preferred bail applications and the said three bail applications were rejected vide order dated 17.07.2025, which shows that the applicant is a habitual offender and further there appears to be no good ground to entertain the present bail application, as such, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant-Prahlad Rathore, involved in Crime No. 123/2025 registered at Police Station Gaurela, District Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the IPC, is rejected at 5 this stage. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and concluded the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil