1 2026:CGHC:23318 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 762 of 2026 Hemant Kumar Jain S/o Shri Ghanshyamdas Jain Aged About 46 Years R/o 15/2121, Mahesh Colony, Srinagar, Road Gali, No. 04, Near Mahesh Bhawan, Gudhiyari, Raipur Tehsil And District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Juhi Anguriya, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Deputy G.A. For Objector/complainant : Mr. Krishna Tandan, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 15.05.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 17/2026 registered at Police Station – Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. As per the prosecution case, the present crime has been registered on the basis of a written complaint alleging that the present RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 applicant, namely Hemant Kumar Jain, along with other co-accused persons, induced the complainant to invest money in a grain trading business being operated under the name and style of “Bhikshu Traders,” of which the applicant is stated to be the proprietor. It is alleged that the GST registration of the said firm also stands in the name of the present applicant and that the entire business operations were being managed and controlled by him. The prosecution further alleges that the applicant was in regular contact with the complainant and persuaded him to invest in grain trading commodities such as gram, turmeric, fennel and cumin by highlighting the possibility of substantial profits arising out of market fluctuations. It is further alleged that the applicant, along with co- accused Kavita Jain and Navdeep Dalal, represented to the complainant that the prices of certain commodities, particularly gram and turmeric, were likely to decrease immediately after Holi and thereafter increase within a short period, thereby assuring handsome returns and profits on investment. According to the prosecution, when the complainant initially expressed reluctance to directly invest in the business due to lack of experience, the accused persons repeatedly persuaded him to advance money in the nature of a loan for a period of six months on the assurance of payment of interest at the rate of 1% per month along with additional profits from the trading business. It is alleged that, relying upon such representations, the complainant transferred a total amount of Rs. 1,45,23,000/- (Rupees One Crore Forty-Five Lakh Twenty-Three Thousand only), out of which Rs. 56,82,000/- was 3 transferred on 02.04.2024 from the bank account of the complainant’s wife, Rs. 28,41,000/- on 03.04.2024 and Rs. 60,00,000/- on 18.04.2024 through RTGS into the bank account maintained with Union Bank of India, Ambikapur Branch, purportedly towards investment/loan in the grain trading business. The prosecution further alleges that, after receipt of the said amount, the accused persons continued to assure the complainant that the money had been invested in grain purchases and that the same would be returned along with profit after completion of the trading cycle; however, even after expiry of the stipulated period of six months, neither the principal amount nor the promised returns were paid back and the accused persons allegedly avoided communication with the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant sent a legal notice dated 22.01.2025 to the present applicant demanding return of the amount. On the basis of the said complaint, the aforesaid crime has been registered against the present applicant and other co-accused persons and investigation has been taken up by the concerned police authorities. Hence, the present anticipatory bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a businessman and has been falsely implicated in the present case, and that the entire prosecution story primarily revolves around alleged business dealings between the complainant and the applicant. It is further submitted that, even if the entire prosecution case is taken at its face value, there is no material to indicate any dishonest or fraudulent intention on the part of the applicant at the 4 inception of the transaction, which is a sine qua non for constituting an offence under Section 420 IPC. She further submits that the alleged transactions pertain to April, 2024, whereas the present criminal proceedings have been initiated after considerable delay, thereby indicating that the complaint is an afterthought and has been lodged only to convert a civil dispute arising out of business transactions into a criminal case for the purpose of exerting pressure upon the applicant. It is also submitted that this Hon’ble Court has been granted anticipatory bail to co-accused Smt. Kavita Jain (wife of the applicant herein) in MCRCA No. 651/2026 vide order dated 01.05.2026, which clearly establishes parity in favour of the present applicant. She further submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, she prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the objector/complainant vehemently oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail and submit that the present applicant, in active connivance with co-accused persons, has cheated the complainant of a huge amount of Rs. 1,45,23,000/- on the pretext of investment in a grain trading business under the name and style of “Bhikshu Traders.” It is submitted that the applicant, being the proprietor of the said firm and in complete control of its financial dealings, along with co-accused persons, induced the complainant to part with his hard-earned money by making false representations regarding assured returns and market fluctuations. It is further submitted that 5 the contention of the applicant that the dispute is civil in nature is not sustainable at this stage, as the allegations clearly disclose a well-planned conspiracy to induce and deceive the complainant from the very inception. It is also submitted that the role of the applicant is specifically attributed in the complaint and investigation is still in progress, and custodial interrogation is necessary for proper recovery and to unearth the full extent of the alleged fraud and involvement of other persons. Thus, considering the magnitude of the offence and its serious financial implications, the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the material available on record and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, particularly taking into account that the dispute arises out of business transactions between the parties and the payments in question were made through banking channels in April, 2024, and further considering that the allegations essentially require detailed examination of documentary evidence to ascertain whether there was any dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction, and the present applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, therefore, without commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Hemant Kumar Jain, on 6 executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting OfÏcer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of her adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan