1 2025:CGHC:53896 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8789 of 2025 Narendra Tandon S/o Bhagwat Aged About 45 Years R/o Village- Gunsari P.S. Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) (Proper Address) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station- Sarkanda District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Smt. Supriya Upasane, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 04.11.2025 1. This is the third 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. 142/2018 registered at Police Station Sarkanda District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 34 of IPC. 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a written complaint before the concerned Police Station alleging that the accused persons had prepared forged documents and executed a registered sale deed of land in favour of the complainant. On the basis of the said complaint, an offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered at Crime No. 142/2018 against the present applicant and other co-accused persons. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the earlier two bail applications of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits vide orders dated 22.01.2025 and 18.03.2025 in MCRC No.8375 of 2025 and MCRC No.2105 of 2025, respectively, therefore this second bail application is filed on the ground that the co-accused, namely, Gajendra Singh Jangde has already been granted bail vide order dated 12.12.2018 in MCRC No.6329 of 2018, so far as present applicant is concerned, out of 9 witnesses, the statement of 3 witnesses have already been recorded till date, the applicant is in jail since 23.10.2024, 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 case pertains to the year 2018 and the said co-accused, who was granted bail was arrested in 2018 and granted bail on 12.12.2018 by the co-ordinate Bench, 3 whereas the present applicant had been absconding since 2018 and was later arrested on 23.10.2024, which hampered the trial, therefore, present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. From perusal of the records, it appears that the earlier two bail applications of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits vide orders dated 22.01.2025 and 18.03.2025 in MCRC No.8375 of 2025 and MCRC No.2105 of 2025, respectively, on the ground that the applicant had been absconding since 2018 and was later arrested on 23.10.2024, whereas the co-accused, on whom the counsel for the applicant has placed reliance, was arrested in 2018 and was granted bail on 12.12.2018 by the Co-ordinate Bench, hence, the case of present applicant is distinguishable from that of the said co-accused, further considering the fact that the applicant had absconded earlier and there is every likelihood that he may abscond again, which would hamper the trial. So far as the status of trial is concerned, out of 9 witnesses, the statement of 3 witnesses have already been recorded till date, further there appears to be no good ground to entertain the present bail application of the applicant. 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 bail application of the applicant-Narendra 4 Tandon, involved in Crime No. 142/2018 registered at Police Station Sarkanda District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 34 of IPC, is rejected at this stage. 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 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