1 2026:CGHC:19988 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 612 of 2026 1 - Seema Vardhan W/o Jai Vardhan Aged About 41 Years Edge Medical Solution Pvt. Ltd. R/o House No. -104, Mangolpur Colony North Rahini ( Delhi) 2 - Gunjan Kumar S/o Shyam Kumar Aged About 40 Years Edge Medical Solution Pvt. Ltd R/o House No. 104 Mangolpur Colony North Rahini (Delhi) 3 - Jogindar, S/o Bijendra Singh Aged About 42 Years Edge Medical Solution Pvt. Ltd R/o House No. 104 Mangolpur Colony North Rahini (Delhi) 4 - Ranjan Kumar S/o Shyam Kumar Aged About 38 Years Edge Medical Solution Pvt. Ltd R/o House No. 104 Mangolpur Colony North Rahini (Delhi) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O P.S. City Kotwali, District. Raigarh C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Amit Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Dr. Sourabh Kumar Pande, Dy.A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 29.04.2026 1. This is the first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.05.01 11:08:48 +0530 2 Crime No. 304/2025 registered at Police Station – SHO, City Kotwali District - Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 120-B and 34 of IPC. 2. Prosecution case in brief is that That as per prosecution story that the complainant Dr. Arun Kediya lodge a written complaint that he has been run one diagnostic centre name & style of Anupam Dignostic Centre in which he performs E RAY, Sonography, & Pathological work in the year 2017-18, he has been purchased a two city scan from the applicant cost of Rs. 48 Lac with 2 year guarantee and he was further arrived MOU with applicant that if any fault are diagnosis in the machine he repaired the machine within 24 hour without any charges when fault came into the machine he contacted to the applicant but he has not treat his technical default when he sent their staff at Delhi that time the applicant said if any send the 17 Lac Rs., he send the new machine and balance amount can be paid after installation of machine when after 25-30 days the machine dispatch from the Delhi, and when the truck arrived at Raigarh her staff contacted with the driver then his driver informed about the arriving at machine near village Dabra when the machine not arrived after 7 & 8 hours of arriving at village Dabhra, he started searching the vehicle after that he find the vehicle in which her technical team replaced the original picture tube. When the manager opposes he stated that he started the machine after installation then he come to knowledge the company purchased the second hand machine and forged the people and when he demanded the money he issued the two cheque which has been bounced on 2019 therefore, he cheated the complainant where the police registered an offence against the applicant. 3 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants are innocent person and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they are falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the complainant has lodged the complaint inordinate delay without any explanation after more than 8 years. He further submits that there are no iota of evidence against the applicants that he has been cheated to the complainant because of new city scan machine which alleged by the complainant is come to in INDIA only refurbished machine has been sold by the agent which cost may be between Rs 55 Lac-65 Lac therefore, the story fabricated by the complainant to lodge the report against the applicant., therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents taken on record. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence and further the fact that there has been an inordinate delay of eight years in lodging the FIR against the present applicants, therefore, I am inclined to extent the benefit of Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant No.1 – Seema Vardhan, applicant No.2 – Gunjan Kumar, applicant No.3- Jogindar and applicant No.4 – Aranjan Kumar on executing a personal bond with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he 4 shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The Applicant 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 him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The Applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d)The Applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaishali