1 2025:CGHC:60104 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8807 of 2025 Sagar Yadav S/o Jammu Lal Yadav Aged About 23 Years R/o Jaijaipur, Sanjay Nagar, Quarter No. 04, P.S. Jaijaipur, District- Sakti, Chhattisgarh. --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station- Balconagar (Police Chowki Rajgamar), District- Korba (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Chandrasen Chouhan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.12.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.511/2025, registered at Police Station- Balconagar (Police Chowki Rajgamar), District- Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of the BNS, 2023. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, the complainant has lodged a written complaint before the concerned Police Station alleging, inter alia, that he was on good terms with the accused persons, and taking advantage of such relationship, the accused persons induced him to transfer an amount of Rs.7,28,000/- through PhonePe on the pretext of assisting him in the purchase of a tractor with 50% government subsidy. However, after receiving the said amount, the accused persons neither purchased the tractor nor returned the money. Acting upon the complaint, the police have registered an FIR against the accused persons and the present applicant for the alleged offence under Section 318(4) of the BNS. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is contended that the entire amount of Rs. 7,28,000/- in question has been transferred exclusively to the bank account of the main accused- Monu Chandra, and no amount whatsoever has ever been transferred to or received by the present applicant. It is further submitted that the only role attributed to the applicant is that the main accused allegedly instructed him to collect a sum of Rs. 6,000/- from the complainant/Sarpanch for payment of certain work, promising to give the applicant Rs. 1,000/- therefrom, however, while the applicant was merely proceeding to collect this amount, the police apprehended him only on the basis of suspicion. No part of the subject amount has been seized from 3 the possession of the applicant, and his implication rests solely on the memorandum statement of the main accused, without any independent corroboration. The applicant has neither committed any act of cheating or fraud nor has he played any role in the alleged transaction. There is no evidence supporting the allegations against him, and he has been wrongly arrested on the basis of unfounded and fabricated accusations. Even if the prosecution story is taken at its face value, no ingredient of the offence under Section 318(4) of the BNS is made out against the applicant, and therefore no prima facie case is established warranting his continued implication in the matter. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and he is languishing in jail since 18.09.2025, though the charge-sheet has been filed, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application of the applicant and also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the applicant, particularly that the entire alleged amount was received only by the main accused – Monu Chandra and no amount has been transferred to or recovered from the present applicant, and further 4 taking into account that his implication rests solely on the memorandum of the co-accused without independent evidence, coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, is in custody since 18.09.2025, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take time, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let applicant, Sagar Yadav, involved in Crime No.511/2025, registered at Police Station- Balconagar (Police Chowki Rajgamar), District- Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of the BNS, 2023, 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 counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 5 (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan