1 2025:CGHC:58678 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9861 of 2025 Surya Prakash Dwivedi S/o Late Shri A.K. Dwivedi Aged About 61 Years Resident Of Lig- 219, Hudco, Bhilai, Civil Tehsil And Revenue District- Durg (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer P.S. Gunderdehi, District- Balod (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Jaydeep Singh Yadav, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.12.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.110 of 2025 registered at Police Station : Gunderdehi District – Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the IPC. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that the complainant Ganesh Ram and VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.12.04 10:50:38 +0530 2 few others preferred a complaint against the applicant alleging that they all are agriculturalists and the present applicant was posted as a Audit and Taxation Officer during the concerned time and the complainant and other persons came in contact with the applicant who then offered the complainant and others of getting them jobs of computer operator, clerk, peon and other posts in Janpad panchayat Offices and in pursuance of the same, different amounts were taken by different persons by the applicant totaling to a tune of Rs. 14,00,000/- but did not got the complainant and others any jobs and started avoiding them. Subsequently the complainant and other persons preferred complaint against the applicant before several forums but no action was taken against the applicant. Later the police- Gunderdehi lodged an FIR against the present applicant dated 23/04/2025 u/s 420 of the IPC for the offence stating the occurrence of offence from 20/06/2021 to 19/12/2023. In subsequence to the said FIR, the applicant surrendered before the Ld. JMFC, Gunderdehi on 29/10/2025 and is in custody since then. A copy of the FIR lodged against the applicant by the complainant(s) in PS Gunderdehi is herein filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations leveled against him are false, fabricated, and an afterthought, as earlier complaints on the same facts were twice found by the concerned police stations to disclose no cognizable offence. Despite this, the present FIR has been lodged illegally and without the mandatory permission of the Magistrate under Section 155(2) CrPC/BNSS, which is impermissible in law, as reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.N. John v. State of U.P. The FIR contains no new facts or evidence, 3 and the registration of the case appears to be motivated by external pressure, particularly by one Akash Soni, against whom the applicant had made several complaints, resulting in personal enmity. The investigation is complete, the applicant voluntarily surrendered on 29.10.2025, cooperated fully, and police custody was taken only for one day, after which he has remained in judicial custody. He has never absconded and had only been attending to his critically injured brother before surrendering. The applicant undertakes not to influence witnesses, tamper with evidence, or leave the country without permission. As a permanent resident, there is no risk of absconding, and he is willing to comply with all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the case. It is further submitted that the complainant has alleged that the present applicant received a sum of Rs. 14,00,000/- in exchange for securing government employment, and that the applicant also has one previous criminal antecedent, Therefore, it is contended that he is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence levelled against the present applicant, and also taking into account that the applicant has one criminal antecedent, that 4 the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, and the applicant has been in judicial custody since 29.10.2025, and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Surya Prakash Dwivedi, involved in Crime No. 110 of 2025 registered at Police Station : Gunderdehi District – Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the IPC, 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 she 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, 5 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 her in accordance with law. 8. However, it will be open for the prosecuting agency to initiate prosecution against the complainant of the present case also who claims to have been cheated by the applicant herein as the conduct of the complainant amounts to giving bribe for obtaining employment through illegal mode. 9. 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 vaibhav