1 2026:CGHC:666 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10529 of 2025 Shamim Khan S/o Mumtaz Khan Aged About 42 Years R/o Vivekanand Colony, Nagarpalika Shivpur Charcha Police Station Charcha District- Korea (C.G.) Presently Residing In Narsingpur Majhgawa P.S. Baikunthpur District- Korea (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Charcha, District- Koriya (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vikram Pratap and Mr. Raghuvendra Pradhan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06.01.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 160/2025 registered at Police Station – Charcha, District- Koriya (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. 2. As per the prosecution story, the complainant Girja Devi, through Ravish Kumar, agreed to purchase 5 decimals of land bearing Khasra No. 67 from the present applicant for a total consideration of Rs. 7,70,000/-. An PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.01.07 17:15:24 +0530 2 advance amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- was paid; however, due to the lockdown in the year 2020, the registration of the land could not be completed. Subsequently, the present applicant informed the complainant that a revenue case was pending in respect of the said plot and thereafter asked her to purchase land from Khasra No. 736/1 instead. Thereafter, the complainant’s husband paid the entire consideration amount of Rs. 7,70,000/- through Ravish Kumar. On 09.05.2022, the land was registered vide Token No. 05. However, upon verification, it was found that the land registered was different from the land originally agreed upon. On the basis of this report, an FIR was lodged against the applicant/accused for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the IPC. During the course of investigation, the applicant was arrested on 18.08.2025 and has been in custody since then. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that co-accused, namely, Pradeep Kumar Thakur has been granted regular bail in MCRC No. 9401/2025 vide order dated 20.11.2025, and another co-accused, namely, Rajkamal has been granted regular bail in MCRC No. 9629/2025 vide order dated 27.11.2025. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, he has two previous criminal antecedents in which the applicant have already been granted bail by this Court passed in MCRC Nos. 10446/2025 and 10368/2025, further the charge-sheet has been filed, and the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent, further the applicant is in jail since 18.08.2025. Hence, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail 3 application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present bail application. He further submits that the applicant has two previous criminal antecedents, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that co-accused, namely, Pradeep Kumar Thakur has been granted regular bail in MCRC No. 9401/2025 vide order dated 20.11.2025, and another co-accused, namely, Rajkamal has been granted regular bail in MCRC No. 9629/2025 vide order dated 27.11.2025, so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, there are two previous criminal antecedents in which the applicant have already been granted bail by this Court passed in MCRC Nos. 10446/2025 and 10368/2025, further the charge-sheet has been filed, and the applicant has two previous criminal antecedents, further the applicant is in jail since 18.08.2025, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime, this Court is of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let applicant - Shamim Khan involved in Crime No.160/2025 registered at Police Station – Charcha, District- Koriya (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on their furnishing a 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 4 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient 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 sufficient 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. 8. Office 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 Preeti