1 2026:CGHC:22697 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3474 of 2026 1 - Narendra Sahu S/o Chaitram Sahu Aged About 53 Years R/o Gram Khapridih, P.O. Manoharpur, P.S. Lalpur, Distt. Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. P.S. Gaurella, Distt. Gaurella Pendra Marwahi, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ankit Singh, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Saumya Rai, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.05.2026 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. 99/2025, registered at Police Station – Gaurella, District – Gaurella-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 225, 112(2) R/w 3(5) of ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 11.03.2026, the complainant, Umendra Sahu, lodged a written report at Police Station Gaurela alleging therein that the present applicant, along with co-accused Saroj Sahu and others, informed him that a gold biscuit had been discovered during JCB excavation work at Kariam. It is alleged that after showing the said gold biscuit to the complainant and getting it examined at Kota, Pandaria and Mungeli, where it was allegedly certified to be genuine gold, the accused persons induced the complainant to purchase the same. Thereafter, the complainant allegedly paid an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- to the applicant and other co-accused persons near Kariam Nala, in consideration whereof five gold biscuits weighing approximately one kilogram were handed over to him. Subsequently, when the complainant got the said gold biscuits examined by a goldsmith at Mungeli, he was informed that the same were fake. It is further alleged that despite being informed about the same, the accused persons avoided the complainant and failed to return the amount of Rs. 10,00,000/-. On the basis of the aforesaid report, an offence under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 225 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, came to be registered against the applicant and other co-accused persons. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case 3 and there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case and the co-accused had already been granted anticipatory bail by the trial Court. The applicant is in jail since 13.03.2026 and trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the fact that no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, that the charge-sheet has already been filed, and further considering that the co- accused has already been granted the benefit of anticipatory bail by the trial Court, coupled with the fact that the applicant is in judicial custody since 13.03.2026 and the conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is inclined to allow the present application. 7. Let applicant, Narendra Sahu, involved in Crime No. 99/2026, registered at Police Station – Gaurella, District – Gaurella-Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2), 4 318(4), 225, 112(2) R/w 3(5) 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 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 5 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. 8. 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 Saxena