1 2025:CGHC:5767 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 919 of 2025 Shantanu Bhardwaj S/o Shri Geetaram Bhardwaj Aged About 38 Years R/o Madwa, Chowki Giraudhpuri, P.S. Gidhouri Tundra, Dist- Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O., P.S. Lawan, District – Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara, C.G. …. Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 31.01.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants arrested in connection with Crime No. 384/2024 registered at Police Station – Lawan, District – Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Chandra Kumar Patel lodged the written complaint stating that he is R/o Vill- RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 Sarkhor, P.S. Lawan, Dist-Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara, that in the month of July 2023 the applicant called him in a private ofÏce running in the name of SGP Job Pvt. Ltd ofÏce No. 538, 5th Floor, Capital Plaza, Near Market Lalpur, Raipur (C.G.) and given the assurance that he can provide the job in Mantrayalay Raipur and received 500/- cash as registration fee and after submission of application form he demanded 62,000/- than the complainant on 22.07.2023 transferred Rs. 1500/-, 20,000/-, on 24.07.2023 Rs. 10,000/- and on 31.07.2023 Rs. 5000/- in his mobile number 7000704486 and gave Rs. 25,000/- as cash Near Village Korda but the applicant has failed to provide job and he has received 62,000/- through him. Hence, this application. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicants are in jail since 24.10.2024, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant has given the assurance to the complainant that he can provide the job in Mantrayalay Raipur and received 500/- cash as registration fee and after submission of application form he demanded 62,000/- than the complainant on 22.07.2023 transferred Rs. 1500/-, 20,000/-, on 24.07.2023 Rs. 10,000/- and on 31.07.2023 Rs. 5000/- in his mobile number 7000704486 and gave Rs. 25,000/- as cash Near Village Korda but no any job has been provided to the complainant and the applicant has cheated the complainant by receiving Rs. 62,000/- through him on the pretext of providing job. It is further submitted that there are a total 3 of 24 criminal antecedents registered against the applicant, out of which there are only 5 antecedents about which the explanation has been given that the trial Court has enlarged the applicant on bail with respect to the said cases, but no any plausible explanation has been given about the rest of 19 cases, he is a habitual offender and he has misused the bail granted to him earlier. As such, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the applicant has given the assurance to the complainant that he can provide the job in Mantrayalay Raipur and received 500/- cash as registration fee and after submission of application form he demanded 62,000/- than the complainant on 22.07.2023 transferred Rs. 1500/-, 20,000/-, on 24.07.2023 Rs. 10,000/- and on 31.07.2023 Rs. 5000/- in his mobile number 7000704486 and gave Rs. 25,000/- as cash Near Village Korda but no any job has been provided to the complainant and the applicant has cheated the complainant by receiving Rs. 62,000/- through him on the pretext of providing job, further the fact that there are a total of 24 criminal antecedents registered against the applicant, out of which there are only 5 antecedents about which the explanation has been given that the trial Court has enlarged the applicant on bail with respect to the said cases, but no any plausible explanation has been given about the rest of 19 cases, he is a habitual offender and he has misused the bail granted to him earlier, and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State 4 of Uttar Pradesh & Another, reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, this bail application of applicant – Shantanu Bhardwaj involved in Crime No. 384/2024 registered at Police Station – Lawan, District – Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 of the IPC, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. OfÏce 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 Rajshekhar