Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13689 (CHH)

MANOJ PRADHAN v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/10510/2025 · 2026-01-05

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:618 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10510 of 2025 Manoj Pradhan S/o Topan Ram Aged About 45 Years R/o Besides Of Pooja Agency, Tulsi Chowk, Gangapur Ambikapur, Distt. Sarguja, Chhattisgarh (As Per Correct Details) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Kotwali, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Pooja Loniya, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. 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 the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 50/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 under Sections 318(4), 3(5), 341, 342, 336, 338, 340 of BNS and Section 10 of C.G. Protection of Depositors Act, 2005. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Tribhuvan Singh, was induced by applicant Abhay Gupta, who claimed to be the head of R.V. Group and Splash Advisor Pvt. Ltd., to avail bank loans and invest 50% of the loan amount in the company’s schemes. It is alleged that the applicants, in a pre- planned and fraudulent manner, collected deposits from several persons by promising financial benefits and quick loan processing, but failed to provide the assured returns. The applicants, along with co-accused, allegedly cheated investors of a total amount of Rs.1,03,08,196/-. Accordingly, an FIR was registered and during investigation, offences under Section 10 of the Act, 2005 was also added. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. She further submits that three identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Manoj Kumar Bhagat, Ragif Hussain @ Vashu, Abhay Kumar Gupta have already been granted regular bail by this Court vide common order dated 06.11.2025 in MCRC Nos. 7593 of 2025, 7613 of 2025 and 7477 of 2025. The applicant is in jail since 06.05.2025, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, she 3 prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant by falsely representing himself as associated with R.V. Group and Splash Advisor Pvt. Ltd., he participated in a pre-planned scheme to induce the complainant and other investors to take bank loans and invest money on false assurances of financial benefits, thereby cheating them of a total amount of Rs.1,03,08,196/-, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing 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 06.05.2025, the fact that though the the applicant by falsely representing himself as associated with R.V. Group and Splash Advisor Pvt. Ltd., he participated in a pre-planned scheme to induce the complainant and other investors to take bank loans and invest money on false assurances of financial benefits, thereby cheating them of a total amount of Rs.1,03,08,196/-, but considering the fact that three identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Manoj Kumar Bhagat, Ragif Hussain @ Vashu, Abhay Kumar Gupta have already been granted regular bail by this Court vide common order dated 06.11.2025 in MCRC Nos. 4 7593 of 2025, 7613 of 2025 and 7477 of 2025, further the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Manoj Pradhan, involved in Crime No. 50/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5), 341, 342, 336, 338, 340 of BNS and Section 10 of C.G. Protection of Depositors Act, 2005, be released on bail on his 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 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 5 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil