1 2026:CGHC:4792 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9804 of 2025 • Krishna Ghasiya S/o Shri Gayaram Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Amgaon, Police Station - Lundra, Distt - Surguja Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station - Lundra, Distt - Surguja Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Keshv Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 28.01.2026 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. 86/2021, registered at Police Station – Lundra, District – Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 120 (B) of Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. The case of the prosecution, that the complainant Suraj Kumar Ghasi, who is son of the present applicant made a written complaint before the concerned police, by stating that, he is residing in village VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.01.29 18:13:40 +0530 2 Amgaon, prior eight months about from today he was rented his own vehicle i.e. Tractor to one Dhanji Shah for Rs. 1000/- per day and agreement was executed for the said purpose. Thereafter as per prayer of Dhanji Shah from the the complainant the uncle of the complainant also gave the tractor for rent purpose to Dhanji Shah and executed an agreement between Dhanji and Dhanelal for the said purpose. That, when after some time Dhanji Shah was not paying the rent amount of the said tractors to the complainant and his uncle by making various affored, then he inquires the matter and it came in the knowledge that, the Dhanji Shah by committed cheating executed a forged agreement for selling the vehicle of Dhnelal in his name, then he filed the complaint against one Dhanji Shah. That, thereafter the concerned police investigated the matter and on 05.07.2021 registered the FIR against one Dhanji Shah and during investigation the concerned police found that, in the said crime the complainant and his father have also involved for preparation of forged agreement, then the name of present applicant and his son have also been added in the said crime and has filed the charge sheet against the three persons under the aforesaid offences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that there are no criminal antecedents registered against the applicant. It is contended that, upon perusal of the FIR, the complaint has been lodged by the son of the present applicant alleging that the co-accused committed the offence by preparing a forged agreement for sale of the vehicles in his name and had prayed for an enquiry into the said transaction. However, without conducting a proper and fair investigation, the police have registered the case 3 against the present applicant. It is further submitted that the son of the present applicant is admittedly the owner of one of the tractors involved in the alleged incident, and therefore, the implication of the present applicant appears to be doubtful at this stage. Further more the alleged incident pertains to the year 2021 and the present applicant has been arrested after a lapse of about four to five years. The applicant is in judicial custody since 25.09.2025. It is also submitted that the investigation is substantially over and the trial is likely to take a considerable time for its conclusion. Continued incarceration of the applicant would serve no fruitful purpose. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel oppose the bail application and submits that applicant has no criminal antecedent and chagesheet has been filed in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, the role attributed to the applicant, absence of criminal antecedents, the delay in arrest, applicant is in jail since 25.09.2025, the period of custody undergone, and the fact that the trial is likely to take time, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let applicant, Krishna Ghasiya, involved in Crime No.86/2021, registered at Police Station – Lundra, District – Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 120 (B) of Indian Penal Code, 1860, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction 4 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 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 vaishali