1 2025:CGHC:8656 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1395 of 2025 Rekh Raj Khilwar S/o Goverdhan Das Khilwar Aged About 36 Years R/o Mohndi, Police Station, Bhilai 93, District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali, District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vivek Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 19.02.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 503/2024, registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District : Durg (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. According to the prosecution's case, the complainant lodged the First Information Report, alleging that the applicant and co-accused ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.02.20 19:08:33 +0530 2 demanded a huge amount of money from the complainant. They promised to secure a government job (Nayab Tehsildar) for the complainant, claiming to have good connections with senior government ofÏcials. However, the applicant failed to fulfill this promise, and except for Rs. 1 lakh and one cheque, the remaining amount was not returned to the complainant. Consequently, the complainant lodged the First Information Report. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated. It is submitted that the complainant's case is that in 2022 and 2023, he gave Rs. 30,50,000/- to the applicant to secure a government job (Nayab Tehsildar). Despite appearing in the examination, the complainant was unsuccessful. Consequently, the First Information Report was registered against the applicant and his wife, a co- accused. It is further submitted that the complainant lodged the written complaint after an inordinate delay, which significantly weakens his case against the applicant. The applicant's memorandum statement, recorded by the police, reveals that he confessed to returning Rs. 11,40,000/- to the complainant through bank transfers or UPI applications. Additionally, the applicant gave the complainant a cheque (No. 877348, dated 27/12/2023), which was dishonored by the bank. The complainant subsequently filed a complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It is submitted that the instant criminal case was registered only after the complainant filed the cheque bounce case, apparently to create pressure on the applicant. This suggests that 3 the criminal case was registered to give a criminal color to a simple complaint case between the parties, with the intention of putting the applicant behind bars and extorting money. Lastly, it is submitted that the complainant himself admitted to advancing money to the applicant to secure a government job, which is an illegal act. The complainant's actions are therefore doubtful and suspicious. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 06.10.2024, conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has already been submitted before competent Court. He submits that the present applicant along with other co-accused allegedly assured the complainant that they would provide government job and obtained a total amount of Rs. 30 Lakhs from the complainant, but no jobs were provided, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Perusal of the case diary goes to show that the present applicant along with other co-accused allegedly assured the complainant that they would provide government job and obtained a total amount of Rs. 30 Lakhs from the complainant, but no jobs were provided, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it does not seem appropriate to grant bail to the applicant. 4 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Rekh Raj Khilwar, involved in Crime No. 503/2024, registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District : Durg (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), is rejected. 8. However, it will be open for the prosecuting agency to initiate 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. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned, is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 10. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek