1 2026:CGHC:23441 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4851 of 2026 Rakesh Kumar Dewangan, S/o. Bhekhuram Dewangan, Aged About 35 Years, R/o. Nawapara (Hathbandh), P.S. Hathbandh, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh (As Per Correct Details) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Sachin Nidhi, Advocate through V.C. For Respondent-State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 21/05/2026 1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 83/2026 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 318 (4), 338, 336 (3), 340 (2) and 341 (2) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that, complainant lodged a report in the concerned police station stating that when complainant was BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN 2 preparing for competition exam, he came in contact with applicant upon which, applicant disclosing his name to be Durgesh Patel has intimated him that he is having contact with higher officials and he could make arrangement for job of Aamin and Chemist. It is also alleged that he has to pay Rs.4.00 lakhs and thereafter, further demand has been raised. Complainant pursuant to the demand made by applicant has deposited a sum of Rs.5,25,000/- and when applicant failed to provide job and returned the amount, complaint was made. Based on the complaint made, crime was registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 05.02.2026. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime, he has not committed any offence as alleged. He contended that amount alleged to have been transferred is in the account of Adarsh Mahant and not in the account of applicant and nor handed it over to applicant. The amount is alleged to have been deposited online, however, in the charge-sheet which the police has filed after investigation, said bank account has not been seized nor Adarsh Mahant has been made co-accused in the crime. There is no transaction in the bank account of the applicant or there is allegation that complainant has handed over any amount or sum of money to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and further submits that according to whats-app chat, it is appearing that applicant has raised demand and accordingly amount has been paid by the complainant. Upon putting a question to learned State counsel, as to whether what is 3 the mode of deposit according to the complainant, she submits that according to the charge-sheets/case diary, amount has been deposited online in the account of Adarsh Mahant. On query put, she fairly submits that in the charge-sheet/case diary, the documents with regard to bank account of Adarsh Mahant has not been seized. She also submits that Adarsh Mahant has also not been made accused in this crime. She also pointed out that one case is registered against the applicant under Crime No.13/2025 of similar nature of offence. 5. Learned counsel for applicant submits that earlier criminal case registered against the applicant was closed pursuant to the settlement entered into between the parties 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 7. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, further the material available in the charge-sheet showing that amount alleged to have been paid by complainant is deposited in the account of Adarsh Mahant, there is no allegation of handing over the amount or deposited the amount in the account of applicant, Adarsh Mahanat has not been arrayed as an accused in the crime, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application. 8. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- 4 (a) 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. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) 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. (d) 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/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE Balram