1 2026:CGHC:19977 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2869 of 2026 Satish Upadhyaya S/o Omkar Nath, Aged About 50 Years (Wrongly Mentioned As Upadhaya) R/o Ward No. 15, Dallirajhara, P.S. Dallirajhara, District Balod (Chhattisgarh) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Police Station Rajhara, District Balod (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Vaishali Mahilang, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29/04/2026 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. 167/2025 registered at Police Station AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Rajhara, District Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a written report at Police Station Rajhara alleging that the accused persons, namely Purnima Upadhyaya and Mamta Mishra, along with the present applicant, induced the complainant and other aspirants on the pretext of providing employment in the mines in November, 2024. It is alleged that each aspirant paid a sum of Rs.40,000/- to the accused persons, and part of the amount was also transferred to the present applicant through PhonePe. It is further alleged that despite receiving the said amounts, the accused persons neither provided any employment nor returned the money. In total, an amount of Rs.10,40,000/- is alleged to have been collected from 26 aspirants by the accused persons. On the basis of the said allegations, the aforesaid crime was registered, and after completion of investigation, the police have filed the charge-sheet before the competent Court. 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. He further submits that two of the co-accused persons, namely, Purnima Upadhayay and Mamta Mishra have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide common order dated 09.09.2025 in MCRCA No.1371 of 2025, so far as 3 criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, the applicant has five criminal antecedents and in all the five cases, applicant is on bail, copies of the said bail orders are filed through covering memo. The applicant is in jail since 09.12.2025, the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he 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. She further submits that the applicant in connivance with co-accused persons, induced the complainant and other aspirants on the false promise of providing employment in mines and collected money from them, including amounts transferred to the applicant through online mode. It is alleged that despite receiving the said amounts, neither any job was provided nor the money was returned, thereby cheating the complainant and other victims. Furthermore, the applicant has five criminal antecedents, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bial. 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 09.12.2025, the fact that though the applicant in connivance 4 with co-accused persons, induced the complainant and other aspirants on the false promise of providing employment in mines and collected money from them, including amounts transferred to the applicant through online mode, further despite receiving the said amounts, neither any job was provided nor the money was returned, but considering the fact that the applicant has five criminal antecedents and in all the five cases, applicant is on bail and two of the co-accused persons, namely, Purnima Upadhayay and Mamta Mishra have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide common order dated 09.09.2025 in MCRCA No.1371 of 2025, further the 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. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Satish Upadhyaya, involved in Crime No. 167/2025 registered at Police Station Rajhara, District Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5) of BNS, 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 5 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. 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