1 2026:CGHC:5992 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1136 of 2026 Raju Bagh S/o Late Kamal Bagh Aged About 42 Years R/o B S U P Colony, Kathadih, P/s Mujgahan, District Raipur C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P/s Tikrapara Raipur C.G. .... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Lukesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.02.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 930/2025 registered at Police Station Tikrapara, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 296, 351(2) of BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the complainant, namely Pushpa Namdev, lodged a complaint before the police, alleging that she was duped of a sum of ₹5,40,000/- on the pretext of being made a member of a society, namely Sahara Jan Seva Kalyan Samiti. Pursuant thereto, an FIR bearing Crime No. 935/2025 under the aforementioned sections was registered KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 against the applicant and he was arrested on 16.11.2025, allegedly in violation of Section 41 Cr.P.C. and in disregard of the catena of judgments passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any of the offences alleged against him and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the entire prosecution story is false, baseless, and fabricated, being founded on incorrect facts allegedly concocted by the police authorities. The applicant was arrested on 16.11.2025 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 296, and 351(2) of the BNS and was produced before the competent Court, which remanded him to judicial custody, where he remains lodged despite his innocence. It is further submitted that his remand to judicial custody itself indicates that no custodial interrogation is required and therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant behind bars. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has no criminal antecedent and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious, as he cheated the complainant of a large amount of money by false promise. The charge-sheet has already been filed and there is prima facie evidence against him. If released on bail, there is a risk that he may influence witnesses or tamper with evidence. Therefore, looking to the seriousness of the offence and the facts of 3 the case, the applicant is not entitled to bail. 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, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 16.11.2025 and the fact that in the present case, charge- sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and no further interrogation is required and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant – Raju Bagh, involved in Crime No. 930/2025 registered at Police Station Tikrapara, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 296, 351(2) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through 4 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 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 Kunal