1 2026:CGHC:1414 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 206 of 2026 Vijay Kumar Yadav @ Vinay Yadav S/o Shri Premlal Yadav Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Khirki, Ahiran Para, District - Korea Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station - Civil Lines, District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rajkumar Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.01.2026 1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 155/2025 registered at Police Station - Civil Lines, District – Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(1) and 340(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Earlier first bail applicant of the applicant has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 30.07.2025 MCRC No.4934 of 2025. 3. The case arises from a complaint filed by Hiralal Rajwade on 12.04.2025, alleging a serious incident of fraud and impersonation. The main accused, PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.01.09 17:54:53 +0530 2 Vivek Kumar Yadav, allegedly misrepresented himself as a Government officer, specifically as a Deputy Engineer posted at the NH-20 Office, Kondagaon. To substantiate his false identity, the accused used forged official documents, including a fake identity card, and a vehicle bearing registration number CG-13-X-6840, on which the words “PWD, Chhattisgarh Government” were falsely inscribed, thereby giving the appearance of a legitimate Government official on duty. Under this false guise, the present applicant visited a Government School in Block Podi Uproda and conducted a fabricated inspection with the intention of gaining the trust of local residents and school authorities. Thereafter, he approached the complainant, Hiralal Rajwade, and another person, Jaipal Das Diwan, and falsely claimed that vacancies were available in the Public Works Department (PWD) under the Tribal and Backward Classes quota for Sub-Engineer Class-I and Class-II posts. He assured them that he had high-level contacts in the department and could secure Government jobs in exchange for money. Believing these representations, the complainants paid various amounts to the accused in installments, namely: (a) Rs. 50,000/- at Ghadi Chowk, Raipur; (b) Rs. 1,50,000/- packed in an envelope and handed over near Das Photocopy Centre, Ghadi Chowk; (c) Rs. 1,00,000/- paid near the Ghadi Chowk Petrol Pump on 07.03.2025; and (d) a final installment of Rs. 40,000/- in cash and Rs. 60,000/- through the digital platform PhonePe on 07.04.2025. The total amount paid was Rs. 4,00,000/-. To further reinforce the deception, the accused issued forged appointment letters. During the course of investigation, the accused was interrogated and allegedly confessed to impersonating a Government officer and to having received money from the complainants under false pretences. A co-accused, namely Anos Das, was also identified and questioned during the investigation. 3 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that though the first bail application was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order 30.07.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4934/2025. He further submits that the applicant has not received any money from the complainant and other to provide the job to them, that there was loan transaction but the complainant and other have concurrent the story and false implicated the applicant in alleged crime. It is further submitted that the co-accused persons has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 02.09.2025 passed in MCRC No. 6968/2025, further the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 22.04.2025. Therefore, he prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed. She further submits that the co-accused, namely, Anos Das who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 02.09.2025 passed in MCRC No. 6968/2025, is a typist and he received Rs. 10,000/- per person for prepared fake appointment letters, main allegation levelled against the applicant Vijay Kumar Yadav, who impersonated himself as Sub-Engineer of NH-20 and misleaded the complainant by promising him that he will provide government employment in the Public Works Department to the complainant and his bail application rejected by this Court in MCRC No.4934 of 2025 vide order dated 30.07.2025, hence, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of allegation made against the applicant and the fact that though the first bail application of the applicant was on merits, further, the co-accused 4 persons has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 02.09.2025 passed in MCRC No. 6968/2025, further the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 22.04.2025, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 8. Accordingly, the Second bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Vijay Kumar Yadav @ Vinay Yadav, involved in Crime No. 155/2025 registered at Police Station - Civil Lines, District – Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(1) and 340(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount 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 their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of BNS. (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 BNS. (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 5 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 concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti