1 2026:CGHC:10255 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1936 of 2026 Abhishek Parata Singh S/o Vijay Kumar Singh Aged About 29 Years R/o Village- Khod Police Station Ramkola Tahsil- Odgi, District- Surajpur (C.G.) … Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Surajpur District- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Pathak, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.02.2026 1. This is the third 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. 603/2023 registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 419, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. First bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 01.08.2024 passed in MCRC No. 5405/2024 on merits. The Second bail application was rejected by this court vide order dated 09.06.2025 passed in MCRC No. 2485/2025. 3. As per the prosecution case, in brief, is that a written complaint was filed PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.02.28 11:02:33 +0530 2 by Panel Advocate of Central Bank of India, Branch- Ambikapur to the effect that while the applicant was working as Commercial Representative (Commission Agent), he has received amount from different bank customers by giving them forged seal and deposit receipt, but the amount was not deposited in the said bank and the same has been used by the applicant for his own, thereby committed the offence of cheating and fraud. It has been alleged that the applicant cheated 76 customers approximately Rs. 67,41,120/-. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that earlier two bail applications of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits. He further submits that out of 80 prosecution witnesses, only 44 witnesses have been examined till date and it is stated that applicant is in jail since 01.04.2024 and the charge-sheet has been submitted. Therefore, he prays that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the earlier two bail applications were rejected on merits on the ground that the applicant received money from customers by providing them fake receipts and bank deposit slips and has used the money for his personal purposed without depositing it into the bank and the case involves multiple victims, and according to the charge sheet, the accused/applicant cheated 76 customers of approximately Rs. 67,41,120/-, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the fact and circumstances of the case and the 3 fact that though the earlier two bail applications were rejected by this Court on merits, but considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 01.04.2024 and out of 80 prosecution witnesses, only 44 witnesses have been examined till date, and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 8. Accordingly, the third bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Abhishek Parata Singh, involved in Crime No. 603/2023 registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 419, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 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 4 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/-- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti