1 2025:CGHC:61313 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9731 of 2025 1 - Jagatram Sahu S/o Shri Samaru Ram Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Dhour P.S. Utai, District Durg (C.G.) 2 - Lekhram Netam S/o Vishnu Netam Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Dhour P.S. Utai, District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicants versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh District Magistrate Balod, District Balod (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Aaditya Shrivastava and Mr. Harshwardhan Singh, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel Dy.A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 16.12.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.404/2025, registered at Police Station – Balod, District – Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that it is alleged that the applicants along with other co-accused have taken Rs. 81,71,000/- from the VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.12.17 17:36:06 +0530 2 complainants for the purpose of land dealing and thereafter also issued cheque of 1,00,000/- and 6,03,000/- which has been dishonored on 13.08.2025 and when complainant has asked about his rest of money then applicants have denied and executed sale deed to some other person by compelled to the complainant and cheated with the complainant. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case and there is no any evidence that appear in the charge-sheet that the present applicants have taken the money from the complainant. He further submits that applicants have not received a single penny from the complainant. He also submits that applicants have no criminal antecedents registered. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 18.10.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail on the ground of parity. 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. He also submits that there are four criminal antecedents registered against the present applicants of the year 2013, 2014 and 2025, it appears that applicants are habitual offender, therefore, they are 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 applicants, 3 submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that applicants are in jail since 18.10.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application on the ground of parity. 7. Let applicants, Jagatram Sahu and Lekhram Netam, involved in Crime No..404/2025, registered at Police Station – Balod, District – Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), be released on bail on their 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 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 4 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