1 2026:CGHC:10550 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1561 of 2026 Narendra Kumar Sharma @ Kartikram S/o Shri Shivnarayan Sharma @ Pramod Sharma Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Lalpur (Hirri), Police Station Gourella, Distt Gpm (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Marwahi, District – Gourella-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Neeta Tulsani Thawani, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 28.02.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 164/2025, registered at Police Station – Marwahi, District – Gourella- Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 340(2), 336(4) and 61(2)(a) of the BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the complainant Amit Kumar Gupta submitted a written complaint stating that on 03.07.2024, at the complainant's petrol pump "Amit Fuel Marwahi," the accused persons Santosh Singh and Narendra Sharma held discussions regarding the supply of diesel and petrol, pursuant to which transportation work RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 amounting to 2,29,804/- and petrol worth Rs.22,584/- was carried out on 20.02.2025. During the year 2025, the accused persons again, by entering into a criminal conspiracy, lured the complainant by assuring him that a tender for sand supply related to construction work at Moserware Power Production Company, Jaithari, would be awarded to him. On this pretext, they took tender-related documents from the complainant and received a cash amount of Rs.2,50,000/-. After a few days, the accused provided a forged work order letter. Thereafter, the accused Narendra Kumar Sharma and Santosh Singh visited the complainant's establishment and stated that sand supply had to be carried out and demanded money towards sand cost, royalty, and transportation vehicle charges. The complainant sought 2-3 days' time, and thereafter, about 4-5 days later, Narendra Sharma came and received money from the complainant. Subsequently, on several dates, money was received from the complainant, and sand royalty slips were sent to the complainant's mobile number 9424151249 by Arvind Vishwakarma alias Chogle and Narendra Sharma. This fully convinced the complainant that the sand supply work had commenced. Consequently, whenever demanded by accused Narendra Sharma from time to time, the complainant continued to give money, totaling approximately Rs.1,59,60,000/-. 3. The said amount was paid at different times in cash and through bank loans to Narendra Sharma's driver, Mahendra Kariyam. When the complainant inquired about bill payments, the accused used to say that the bill payment was under process and asked him not to worry, stating that as a guarantee they were giving a cheque of Rs.1,50,00,000/- 3 from their other firm, Ganga Filling Station, Jaithari. The cheque bearing number 019941, account number 48401657700133130, dated 27.12.2024, signed by Preeti Singh, was brought and handed over by Santosh Singh, assuring that payment would be made soon. When the complainant pressed for bill payment, the accused provided the contact number of a person named Maskole. Upon calling number 7000200578, he stated that the bill was under process and payment would be made. However, when payment was still not made and the complainant again inquired, the accused Narendra Kumar Sharma, Arvind Vishwakarma, and Santosh Singh stated that through Narendra Sharma they were presently sending a cheque of 24,00,000/- bearing cheque number 000022 dated 26.05.2025, and cheques of Rs.25,00,000/- bearing cheque numbers 000017 and 000018 dated 26.05.2025. 4. According to the written complaint, the complainant deposited cheque number 000022 in the bank for payment, but the said cheque was dishonoured due to insufficient funds. As the bill amount remained pending for a long time, upon visiting the company office to inquire, the complainant came to know that no work order/purchase order for sand supply had been issued in his name, nor was any sand supplied in his name. The T.P. (transport permits) sent by the accused regarding sand unloading were also found to be forged. Thus, accused Narendra Kumar Sharma, in connivance with the other accused persons, with the intention to cheat, jointly prepared forged documents for sand supply, created a forged purchase/work order as a valuable security. and presented it as genuine, thereby causing loss to the complainant and 4 wrongful gain to themselves. In this manner, they cheated the complainant of a total amount of Rs.1,59,60,000/-, causing him financial loss. Based on the written complaint of the complainant, the aforesaid offence has been registered against the applicant and other co-accused persons. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed. 5. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there are 3 criminal antecedents of the applicant in which he has been acquitted. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 17.09.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 6. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there are 3 criminal antecedents of the applicant in which he has been acquitted, and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that complainant, Amit Kumar Gupta, proprietor of Amit Fuel Marwahi, was induced by accused Santosh Singh and Narendra Sharma to provide transportation services and supply fuel, followed by a larger conspiracy related to a sand supply tender for Moserware Power Production Company, Jaithari. On false assurances, the accused obtained tender documents and Rs.2,50,000/- in cash, later providing a forged work order. Believing the work had commenced, the complainant paid amounts towards sand cost, royalty, and transportation on multiple occasions, totaling approximately 1,59,60,000/-, paid in cash and through bank loans. Forged sand royalty slips and transport permits 5 were sent to reinforce the deception. Cheques issued as security were dishonoured due to insufficient funds. Upon inquiry, the complainant discovered that no work order or sand supply existed in his name. Thus, the accused allegedly conspired to cheat by using forged documents, causing wrongful loss to the complainant and unlawful gain to themselves, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there are 3 criminal antecedents of the applicant in which he has been acquitted, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 17.09.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 9. Let applicant, Narendra Kumar Sharma @ Kartikram, involved in Crime No. 164/2025, registered at Police Station – Marwahi, District – Gourella-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 340(2), 336(4) and 61(2)(a) of the 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 6 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. 10. Office 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 Rajshekhar