1 2025:CGHC:4992 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 150 of 2025 1 - Jaya Bajpai W/o Ashish Bajpai Aged About 60 Years R/o Flat No. 101, Sundar Nagar, Purani Basti, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Kumari Tanya Bajpai D/o Ashish Bajpai Aged About 25 Years R/o Flat No. 101, Sundar Nagar, Purani Basti, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station Purani Basti, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28.01.2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 5/2025 registered at Police Station – Purani Basti, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 read with Section 34 of IPC. 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that, the F.I.R. of the incident was lodged on 04.01.2025 on the instance of Mayur Nirmalkar in KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 respect of the incident occurred on 13.02.2023. The F.I.R. was lodged inter alia on the allegations that, the applicants had executed the agreement dated 13.02.2023 for sale of certain properties situated at Bhatagaon Raipur, for a consideration of Rs. 750 per Sqft. and has paid sum of Rs. 1,30,00,000/- as part performance. It has been alleged that the applicants have committed an offence of cheating and had entered into an agreement in respect of the lands which does not belongs to the applicants. Total 4 agreements were executed for different piece of lands. Upon such act of the applicants, the aforesaid offences were registered against the applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants have falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case and the F.I.R. of the incident was lodged on 04.01.2025 i.e. after near about 1 year from the date of the execution of the agreement. He further submits that the lands in question belongs and is ownership one Smt. Rekha Goyal who had executed the sale agreement in favor of Tanya Bajpai (Annexure A/3) is the copy of the agreement executed between original owner Rekha Goyal and Tanya Bajpai. The applicants received a great shock when a public notice was issued by the third parties in the news paper, inviting objections in respect of the same property. On 19.03.2021 a notice was issued to Rekha Goyal. Near about 4 agreements were executed by Ashish Bajpai the father of applicant No. 2, Soumya Bajpai sister of applicant No. 2, Tanya Bajpai (applicant No.2 herein) and Jaya Bajpai (mother of applicant No.2). Despite of repeated requests the Mayur Nirmalkar 3 was neither executing the sale deed nor paying the balance amount of consideration, therefore a notice was issued and has requested the complainant to execute the sale deed on or before 17.10.2024 and failing which the agreement itself would be come to an end which looks like a pure civil dispute has been given the color of the criminal offence. Mere breach of contract does not amount to an offence under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code. He further submits that the applicants were not the owner of the property in question is not correct infact the original owner entered into an agreement with Tanya Bajpai. Tanya Bajpai had entered into an agreement with Rekha Goyal and sum of Rs. 2 Crores have been paid to Rekha Goyal and the detailed have been given in the agreement itself, which shows that the said amount was transferred to Rekha Goyal, which itself shows that Tanya Bajpai is a Bonafide purchaser. Out of 2 Crore rupees, 95 lacs was paid through RTGS and remaining amount was paid through cash. He later submits that out of 10 acres of land, 9 acres of land belongs to Jaya, Soumya and Tanya Bajpai (Annexure A/11) are the copies of the relevant portion of the registered sale deeds and 1 acre belongs to Rekha Goyal and Tanya Bajpai has paid the huge amount. Tanya Bajpai had executed the agreement to sale in favor of Ashish Bajpai. Annexure A/12 is the copy of the said agreement. In the said agreement the daughter has authorized the father to sale or entered into an agreement with the parties. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the agreement executed between Mayur, Vinod and Ashish Bajpai, 4 itself shows that the complainant has paid Rs. 50 lakhs to Rekha Goyal through Ashish Bajpai. The civil dispute has been given the color of the criminal offence and instead of filing of the Civil Suit for specific performance of contract the criminal case has been registered. The father namely Ashish Bajpai has been granted bail by the learned trial Court on 09.01.2025 and further the applicants are ready to abide by all the directions and conditions, which may be imposed by this Court while granting anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the non- applicant opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant and submits that from perusal of the case diary, it appears that the accused persons executed a sale agreement for their land with the complainants, receiving Rs. 1,30,00,000/-. However, they falsely claimed ownership of land belonging to Rekha Goyal (Khasra No. 70/6, 79/1, total area 0.4930 hectares) without her authorization. The accused persons then executed another sale agreement for said land, receiving payment from the complainants and attempted to sell the land to another person, committing fraud and cheating. Accordingly, the present applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the allegations levelled against them and material available on record and further the fact that the husband of the 5 applicant No. 1 has already been granted regular bail by the learned trial Court so far as the present applicants are concerned , they are being lady (mother and daughter), therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicants. 8. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants- Jaya Bajpai and Kumari Tanya Bajpai, on executing a personal bond and one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on the following conditions:- (a) They shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such fact to the Court or any police ofÏcer. (b) They shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) They shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) That in case of change of address she will inform new address to investigating agency. (e) They shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal