1 2026:CGHC:18181 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3600 of 2026 Sudhir Saini S/o Kuldip Saini Aged About 32 Years R/o Aasma Colony, Sakri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer Police Station - Civil Line, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State. : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21.04.2026 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. 68/2026 registered at Police Station Civil Line, District – Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 61(2), 318(4), 336(3) and 338 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS). 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a written complaint was lodged by the complainant, Amit Bhaskar, before Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur, stating that in the month of January, one Surya Sahu, a resident of Village Khamhariya, Patwari Halka No. 24, RNM Jaroundha, ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.04.22 11:26:52 +0530 2 Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, approached him for the sale of land bearing Khasra Nos. 514/1, 515, 511, 512/4, 514/3, 516/2, 517/2, 524, and 525, having a total area of 1.40 acres. It was further stated that Surya Sahu showed the B-1, P-2, Khasra documents, and the original Rin Pustika, and also provided a set of photocopies. He also showed the location (mouja) of the land and assured the complainant that he would arrange contact with the landowner for finalizing the deal. The complainant was informed that the landowner was an elderly woman who was unable to travel, and that a registered Power of Attorney had been executed in favour of a representative, on the basis of which the transaction would be carried out. The complainant agreed to proceed with the deal. After a few days, the applicant/accused, Sudhir Saini, came along with one Sandeep Banjare, who claimed to be the registered Power of Attorney holder. They provided a copy of the Power of Attorney for the purpose of selling the said land and proceeded to execute an agreement. They represented that the land bearing Khasra Nos. 514/1 and 515, admeasuring approximately 0.136 hectares and 1.823 hectares respectively (approximately 5 acres), was available for sale. It was further stated that the remaining land had already been agreed to be sold to them and that they themselves were authorized to act as Power of Attorney holders. Upon inquiry by the complainant, negotiations were carried out with Surya Sahu, and the land was agreed to be sold at the rate of Rs. 70 lakhs per acre. An agreement was executed between Sudhir Saini and Sandeep Banjare on 12/02/2025, and an amount of Rs. 11 lakhs was paid by the complainant. However, prior to execution of the sale deed (registry), the complainant made further inquiries regarding the land and came to know from local persons that the land was not for sale and that the photograph of the alleged landowner did not match the 3 actual owner. Subsequently, the real landowner confirmed that the land was not for sale and even afÏxed a board to that effect. Thereafter, when the complainant contacted Surya Sahu regarding the agreement, it was revealed that Sudhir Saini and Sandeep Banjare had misled him. It is alleged that, in conspiracy, the applicant/accused persons prepared a fake and forged Power of Attorney in place of the actual landowner by afÏxing the photograph of another woman, executed a false agreement, and dishonestly obtained Rs. 11 lakhs from the complainant. On the basis of the written complaint, the concerned police station registered a crime and initiated investigation for offences under Sections 61(2), 318(4), 336(3), and 338 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the foresaid case. He submits that the applicant moved an application under the RTI Act, 2025, seeking details of treatment from the concerned doctor, along with a copy of the medical treatment report. He also submits that Sandeep Banjare gave a cheque of Rs. 6 lakhs to the present applicant, which was deposited in his account. Thereafter, the said amount was withdrawn and returned to Sandeep Banjare. This clearly reflects that the applicant was not involved in the alleged crime. The applicant has not been involved in any such offence. The report was lodged on 15/01/2026, whereas the agreement between the applicant and the complainant was executed on 12/02/2025. He submits that the agreement was executed between both parties, and the matter is purely of a civil nature, arising out of a transaction for the sale of the aforesaid land. He submits that on the basis of a memorandum, statements have been recorded by the concerned police, and as per the case diary available on record, the applicant has been implicated in the present 4 case. He submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 16.01.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail. 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 the competent Court in the present case. 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, and upon prima facie consideration that the agreement was executed between the parties and the dispute appears to be of a civil nature arising out of a transaction for sale of the aforesaid land, further, that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the applicant has been in custody since 16.01.2026 and the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant – Sudhir Saini, involved in Crime No. 68/2026 registered at Police Station Civil Line, District – Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 61(2), 318(4), 336(3) and 338 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), be released on bail on 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 5 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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. 8. 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 Abhishek