1 2025:CGHC:53442 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8649 of 2025 Dadhibal Singh @ David Tigga S/o Sukhdev Singh Aged About 47 Years R/o House No. 705, Ward No. 6 Nagri Rani Durgavati Ward, P.S. Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. Present Address- Shadani Darbar, Boriyakala, R.D.A. Colony, P.S. Mujgahan, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Details As Per Charge-Sheet) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Tikarapara, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Abhishek Nirala, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Supriya Upasane, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 31.10.2 025 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. 570/2025, registered at Police Station – Tikarapara, District – Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318 (4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2 2. The essence of the FIR is that the complainant has alleged that the present applicant received a sum of Rs.20,50,000/- in exchange for securing government employment in Raipur (C.G.) for the complainant and his acquaintance, Sanjay Chauhan. Based on these allegations, the police registered the FIR, arrested the applicant, and subsequently filed a charge-sheet before the competent court. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant had taken a loan from the complainant at an interest rate of 5% and had provided a security cheque in that regard. When the applicant failed to repay the loan amount, the complainant lodged the present FIR on baseless and false allegations. It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and that the charge-sheet has already been filed in this case. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 29.07.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Therefore, the learned counsel prays that the applicant may be released on 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. It is further submitted that the complainant has alleged that the present applicant received a sum of Rs.20,50,000/- in exchange for securing government employment in Raipur (C.G.) for the complainant and his acquaintance, Sanjay Chauhan, and further 3 the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent of the year 2012, 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 and the fact that the applicant had taken a loan from the complainant at an interest rate of 5% and had provided a security cheque in that regard, when the applicant failed to repay the loan amount, the complainant lodged the present FIR, further the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 29.07.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Dadhibal Singh @ David Tigga, involved in Crime No. 570/2025, registered at Police Station – Tikarapara, District – Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318 (4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 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 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 4 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, 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 5 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 Preeti