1 2026:CGHC:22379 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3346 of 2026 • Ram Singh Gond S/o Late Kishore Singh Gond, Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Jagdalla, Ward No. 26, Champa, Thana Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh, Through-P.S.-Champa, District-Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Pandey, Advocate. For State/Non-applicant : Mr. Priyank Rathi, G.A. For Objector : Ms. Soniya Kuldeep Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.05.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.50/2026 registered at Police Station Champa, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of IPC. ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.05.15 17:38:03 +0530 2 2. As per the case of prosecution, the applicant/accused, Ram Singh Gond, allegedly prepared and used a forged death certificate of his great-grandfather, late Sunhar Gond, by falsely showing his date of death as 04.05.1970 instead of 14.10.1979, in order to challenge an earlier land sale transaction and obtain unlawful benefit over the disputed property. It is alleged that the accused, in collusion with local officials, used the forged documents to get the revenue records mutated in favour of his family and to challenge the mutation earlier granted in favour of the complainant’s grandfather. During investigation, documents and specimen signatures were seized and prima facie material regarding the involvement of the accused was found. Accordingly, Crime No. 50/2026 was registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the IPC. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in crime in question. He further submits that the present applicant is an elected Councillor of Ward No. 26 of Champa Municipal Council and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to political rivalry and vendetta. It is submitted that the allegations levelled against the applicant are motivated and have been made with an oblique motive to tarnish his public image. He also submits that the complainant had earlier filed a complaint case under Section 175(3) of the B.N.S. Act before the learned J.M.F.C., Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) on 16.07.2025, wherein the 3 statement of the complainant was also recorded. However, after the matter was fixed for further hearing, the complainant moved an urgent application on 02.02.2026 and withdrew the said complaint case. Copies of the complaint case, statement and order sheets have been filed as Annexure A/3 and Annexure A/4 respectively. He later submits that the death certificate of late Sunhar was issued on the basis of an application preferred by the applicant’s grandfather, namely Saharta, before the competent authority, and the present applicant had neither submitted any application for issuance of the death certificate nor committed any act of cheating. It is further submitted that the dispute involved in the present matter is purely civil in nature, however, after an inordinate delay, a false criminal report has been lodged against the applicant under political pressure. The applicant is in jail since 20.02.2026 and the charge-sheet has not been filed, further the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that charge sheet has not been filed in the present case. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the objector has also opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that the applicant/accused, in connivance with co-accused persons and certain government officials, deliberately fabricated and used forged documents including a false death certificate of his great- 4 grandfather, Late Sunhar Gond, by falsely showing the date of death as 04.05.1970 instead of 14.10.1979, with an intention to grab valuable immovable property and defeat the lawful rights of the complainant’s family. It is further submitted that despite a valid registered sale deed dated 19.11.1976 executed by Late Sunhar Gond in favour of the complainant’s grandfather, the accused initiated fraudulent proceedings to disturb the settled title and possession of the complainant. He further submits that the accused actively participated in preparation of a false affidavit dated 31.10.2017 executed by Sahrata, wherein the incorrect date of death of Late Sunhar Gond was declared, and that the accused himself acted as identifier of the deponent and purchased the stamp paper used for the affidavit. On the basis of such forged documents, the accused allegedly procured a fabricated death certificate and used the same before the revenue authorities for setting aside the earlier mutation and for obtaining a “fauti mutation” order dated 26.03.2025 in favour of his family. He also submits that during investigation, the accused made a memorandum statement disclosing his involvement along with municipal and revenue officials in preparation of forged documents and several incriminating documents have been seized from his possession. The objector submits that the accused is an influential person being an elected councillor and there exists every likelihood of tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses if released on bail. Therefore, the applicant 5 is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant that though the applicant allegedly in connivance with co-accused persons and local officials, prepared and used a forged death certificate of his great-grandfather, Late Sunhar Gond, by falsely showing the date of death as 04.05.1970 instead of 14.10.1979, with an intention to obtain unlawful benefit over the disputed land and in the present case charge-sheet has not been filed, but considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is in judicial custody since 20.02.2026, further the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 9. Let the Applicant – Ram Singh Gond, involved in Crime No.50/2026 registered at Police Station Champa, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of IPC., be released on bail on furnishing 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 6 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 their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fail 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Arpan