1 2025:CGHC:61368 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9122 of 2025 • Punaram Sahu S/o Lakhan Lal Sahu Aged About 52 Years R/o Village- Khorpa, Tahsil And District- Raipur (Wrongly Mentioned As Tahsil- Khorpa), C.G. ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Abhanpur, District - Raipur, C.G. ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Gautam Khetrapal, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 16.12.2025 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.306/2025, registered at Police Station – Abhanpur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 467 and 468 of IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the applicant persuaded the complainant Jagannath Vishwakarma to sell his land, assuring that he would get the revenue error corrected after purchase. It is alleged 2 that the applicant, in conspiracy with others, sold the complainant's leasehold (government) land to Luman Sahu, executed an agreement to sell on 28.09.2023, and registered the sale deeds on 18.10.2023 in the names of Lakhan Sahu's family members. It is further alleged that the applicant forged documents, obtained registry of government land fraudulently, and misappropriated the amount of 66,84,000/-. ₹ The copy of the FIR is annexed herewith as ANNEXTURE A/2. That the amount mentioned in the First Information Report, i.e.,, ₹66,84,000/- (Rupees Sixty-Six Lakh Eighty-Four Thousand only), alleged to have been misappropriated by the applicant, is contradictory to the amount stated in Civil Appeal No. 507/2025, wherein sale the consideration was only *12,05,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakh Five Thousand only), duly paid to Rajendra Vishwakarma through cheque. This clear contradiction between the FIR and the civil court records reflects that the allegations made in the FIR are exaggerated an inconsistent with the documentary evidence already available on record. The copy of plaint is annex herewith as ANNEXTURE A/3. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant is a third party to the disputed transaction. The alleged sale execution and registry were carried out between the complainant along with their family members and Luman Sahu and Krishna Kumar Sahu, the applicant has neither executed any sale deed nor received any consideration amount from the complainant. He further submits that applicant has two criminal antecedents and same has been explained by filing additional affidavit, out of which, in one case applicant has been acquitted from 3 all charges and another is pending for it’s conclusion and third case also pointed out by the learned State counsel, which is recently registered on 05.12.2025 at Police Station Abhanpur, District-Raipur for similar nature against the present applicant. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case and applicant is in jail since 21.08.2025 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 the charge-sheet has been filed in this case and there are three criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, out of which two cases are pending for their conclusion, it appears that applicant is a habitual offender, 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, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 21.08.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Punaram Sahu, involved in Crime No.306/2025, registered at Police Station – Abhanpur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 467 and 468 of IPC. of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 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:- 4 (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 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 vaishali