1 2026:CGHC:21238 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3349 of 2026 Aatma Ram Sahu S/o Kashiram Sahu Aged About 42 Years R/o Village- Gorba Police Station- Bilaigarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Kasdol District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Non-applicant Along with MCRC No. 3492 of 2026 Aatma Ram Sahu S/o Kashiram Sahu Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Gorba Police Station Bilaigarh, District- Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Kasdol District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Non-applicant Along with MCRC No. 3388 of 2026 Aatma Ram Sahu S/o Kashiram Sahu Aged About 42 Years R/o Village - Gorba Police Station - Bilaigarh, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station- Kasdol District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Non-applicant Along with MCRC No. 3356 of 2026 Aatma Ram Sahu S/o Kashiram Sahu Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Gorba Police Station Bilaigarh District- Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station – Gidhouri Tundra, District – Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Non-applicant Along with MCRC No. 3406 of 2026 Aatma Ram Sahu S/o Kashiram Sahu Aged About 42 Years R/o Village- Gorba Police Station - Bilaigarh District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station Kasdol, District – Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Dr. Sourabh K. Pande, Dy. Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 06.05.2026 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 Nos. 378/2025, 470/2025, 433/2025 and 430/2025 registered at Police Station – Kasdol, District – Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5), 318(3), 3(5) and 111 of BNS, and Crime No. – 170/2025, registered at Police Station – Gidhouri Tundra, District – Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 111 and 3(5) of BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution in MCRC No.3349/2026, is that the complainant Gopal Prasad Dewangan came in contact of co- accused namely Ramnarayan Sahu and during that he was offered to invest in 3 share trading to double the amount invested, on such assurance the complainant invested total of Rs.40,82,000/- to be doubled in period of two years, but Co-accused did not returned the amount. Thereafter, the crime was registered against the co-accused and the applicant also. 3. The case of the prosecution in MCRC No.3492/2026, is that the complainant Rajkumar Yadu came in contact of co-accused and his son and during that he was offered to invest in share trading to double the amount invested, on such assurance the complainant invested Rs. 37,50,000/- and 24,00,000/- through cash and rest amount transferred in bank of Devnarayan and Janki Sahu total sum of Rs. 81,00,000/- was invested to be double in two years, but Co-accused did not returned the amount. Thereafter, the crime was registered against the co-accused and the applicant also. 4. The case of the prosecution in MCRC No.3388/2026, is that the complainant Rameshwar Kumar Kashyap made a complaint alleging that he along with two other had given Rs.22,00,000/- to Ramnarayan Sahu, Devnarayan Sahu, Bhuneshwar Sahu, Ranu Dhruv for investment in share trading. It has been further alleged that the said amount was taken by the above mentioned person on pretext of returning the said amount with double in two years. It has also been alleged that the said amount was deposited in the account of Devnarayan Sahu through net banking on several occasions. But the said amount was not returned. Thereafter, the crime was registered against the co-accused and the applicant also. 5. The case of the prosecution in MCRC No.3356/2026, is that between 4 31.03.2023 to 30.05.2025 complainant Deepak Kumar Dansena came in contact of co-accused Ramnarayan Sahu and his son Gulshan Sahu and during that he was offered to invest in share trading to double the amount invested, On such assurance the complainant invested Rs. 1,58,45,000/- Rs and his friend Vijay Sharma invested 93,10,000/- Rs through cash and transferred in bank account of Devnarayan to be doubled in period of two years, it is further alleged that complainant invested Rs.5,50,000/- has been given to the present applicant but they did not returned the amount. Thereafter, the crime was registered against the co-accused and the applicant also. 6. The case of the prosecution in MCRC No.3406/2026, is that the complainant Chhedilal Sahu came in contact of co-accused and during that he was offered to invest in share trading to double the amount invested, on such assurance the complainant invested total sum of Rs. 39,10,000/- was invested to be doubled in period of two years, but the co-accused did not returned the amount. Thereafter, the crime was registered against the co-accused and the applicant also. 7. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that a total of 5 criminal cases have been registered against the applicant, for which the instant bail applications have been filed, and except these cases, no other cases have been registered against him. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that in Crime No.378/2025, the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.10.2025 in MCRC No.7007/2025, in Crime No. 430/2025, the co-accused has 5 been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.10.2025 in MCRC No.7004/2025, in Crime No.170/2025, the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.12.2025 in MCRC No.8595/2025, in Crime No.433/2025, the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.12.2025 in MCRC No.9221/2025, and in Crime No.470/2025, the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.10.2025 in MCRC No.6996/2025. The applicant is in jail since 11.09.2025, 11.09.2025, 11.09.2025, 04.09.2025 and 11.09.2025, respectively, and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 8. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that the applicant is said to have offered the complainants to invest some amount in share trading and taken money from the complainants on the pretext of doubling the amount, and thereafter, no such amount was returned to the complainants, but he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused person has been granted bail by this Court in these cases. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 10. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that a total of 5 criminal cases have been registered against the applicant, for which the instant bail applications have been filed, and except these cases, no other cases have been registered against him, 6 charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, further the fact that in Crime No.378/2025, the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.10.2025 in MCRC No.7007/2025, in Crime No. 430/2025, the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.10.2025 in MCRC No.7004/2025, in Crime No.170/2025, the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.12.2025 in MCRC No.8595/2025, in Crime No.433/2025, the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.12.2025 in MCRC No.9221/2025, and in Crime No.470/2025, the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.10.2025 in MCRC No.6996/2025, and the applicant is in jail since 11.09.2025, 11.09.2025, 11.09.2025, 04.09.2025 and 11.09.2025, respectively, and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 11. Let applicant, Aatma Ram Sahu, involved in Crime Nos. 378/2025, 470/2025, 433/2025 and 430/2025 registered at Police Station – Kasdol, District – Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5), 318(3), 3(5) and 111 of BNS, and Crime No. – 170/2025, registered at Police Station – Gidhouri Tundra, District – Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 111 and 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 7 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 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. 12. 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