1 2025:CGHC:55370 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1762 of 2025 Hemant Kumar Netam S/o Mohit Ram Netam Aged About 34 Years Caste Gond R/o Jailpara Road Near Mangal Bhawan, Surajpur, District- Surajpur (C..G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Surajpur, District- Surajpur (C..G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Ram Vifal Ram Rajwade, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 13.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 236/2025, registered at Police Station – Surajpur District – Surajpur (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC). VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.11.17 14:30:53 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story in brief is that the studying along with the applicant, therefore acquainted Police Station, Surajpur, alleging therein that he was with the applicant. In the month of December, 2021 he met with the applicant and informed the applicant that he has applied for the post of Forest Guard, upon which, the applicant given his mobile number and asked for visiting the house of applicant and he will provide the job to the complainant on the post of Forest Guard, for which, the complainant would pay Rs. 6,00,000/-. On 27.01.2022 the applicant visited the house of applicant and the applicant has given his account number for depositing the amount. On 27.01.2022 the complainant has deposited the amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- in the bank account of applicant through RTGS. The applicant informed the complainant that his name find place in the list, therefore he assured for payment of remaining amount of Rs. 3,00,000/-, otherwise his name would be delisted, upon which, the complainant has asked the applicant for returning the amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- and the applicant agreed to return the said amount, but till date he has not returned the said amount to the complainant. On the basis of above report, the offence U/s 420 of IPC has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has never received any money from the complainant for providing any government job, and the complainant, being an educated person, is fully aware that no government employment can be obtained through monetary payment. The applicant has neither cheated nor defrauded the complainant in any manner. It is further submitted that 3 within a short span of two days, i.e., from 15.05.2025 to 16.05.2025, the complainant and his associates have lodged three different cases against the applicant, and except for these three cases, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent; copies of FIR No. 235/2025 and 288/2025 are collectively annexed as Annexure A/3. The dispute between the applicant and the complainant pertains to a monetary transaction, which is purely civil in nature and does not constitute any criminal offence. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant dishonestly induced the complainant by falsely promising to secure a Forest Guard job in exchange for Rs. 6,00,000/-. Relying on this assurance, the complainant deposited Rs. 3,00,000/- into the applicant’s bank account, but the applicant neither secured the job nor returned the money. The bank transaction and the conduct of the applicant clearly establish a prima facie case of cheating under Section 420 IPC. He further submits that the applicant has two other cases of a similar nature pending against him, indicating that he is a habitual offender. Considering the seriousness of the allegations and the material collected during investigation, the applicant is not entitled to bail 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence and the material available in the case diary, it is evident that the applicant induced the complainant by dishonestly assuring him of securing a Forest Guard 4 job in exchange for Rs. 6,00,000/-, and acting on this representation, the complainant deposited Rs. 3,00,000/- into the applicant’s bank account through RTGS, however, the applicant neither fulfilled the promise nor refunded the money, thereby establishing a prima facie case of cheating under Section 420 IPC. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that two other similar cheating cases are pending against the applicant, indicating repeated criminal conduct and suggesting that he is a habitual offender. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, the documentary evidence such as bank transactions, and the overall conduct of the applicant, this Court finds no ground to grant bail, and accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application stands rejected. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Hemant Kumar Netam, involved in Crime No. 236/2025, registered at Police Station – Surajpur District – Surajpur (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC), is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav