1 2026:CGHC:21407 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4242 of 2026 Ravishanker Gandharv S/o- Ramsajivan Gandharv Aged About 30 Years R/o- Ward No. 03, Tikrapara Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Police Station - City Kotwali, District- Mungeli (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Saurabh, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. Government Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.05.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 489/2025 registered at Police Station : City Kotwali, District Mungeli (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, the FIR was lodged by the complainant, Smt. Lata Kesharwani, against Ravi Shankar Gandharva and his family members, alleging that she was introduced to the accused Ravi Shankar Gandharva by Prakash Jaiswal in the year 2023. Ravi Shankar ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.05.08 13:13:13 +0530 2 Gandharva was working as a salesman at a Maruti Suzuki showroom at Gidha, Mungeli. According to the FIR, in June 2023, the complainant initially advanced a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- in cash to Ravi Shankar Gandharva as financial assistance for the construction of a house, and the said amount was returned to her after approximately six months. Thereafter, Ravi Shankar Gandharva allegedly proposed an investment scheme, claiming to be connected with Maruti Suzuki Company, and assured the complainant that the invested amount would be doubled within six months along with monthly bonuses and other benefits, including a car. It was further represented that one Ajay Gandharva, allegedly working as an HR Manager at Maruti Suzuki, was handling the said scheme. Believing the representations made by the accused, the complainant allegedly paid various amounts to Ravi Shankar Gandharva between the years 2023 and 2025, partly in cash and partly through online transfers, cheques, and UPI transactions. The payments were allegedly made to the personal bank accounts of Ravi Shankar Gandharva, his father Ramsajeevan Gandharva, his sister Kiran Gandharva, and his wife Manisha Gandharva. As per the complainant, the total amount paid comes to Rs. 29,63,500/-. The FIR further states that, upon repeated demands, an amount of approximately Rs. 4,00,000/- was returned by Ravi Shankar Gandharva in installments. It is alleged that since November 2024, the accused persons stopped returning the remaining amount and began avoiding the complainant. The complainant has also alleged that the main accused induced several other persons in a similar manner and collected money from them on the same pretext. On the basis of the said allegations, the present FIR has been registered at City Kotwali Police Station, Mungeli, and investigation has been initiated against Ravi Shankar Gandharva and his family 3 members for the alleged offences of cheating and criminal breach of trust. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the prosecution has levelled false and fabricated allegations against the applicant, and there is a significant delay of three years in the lodging of the FIR. He also submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and the applicant has been in custody since 28.11.2025. As the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, he therefore prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that in the present case, the charge- sheet has not submitted before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of offence and further the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, moreover, the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court which is taken on record, the present applicant has been languishing in jail since 28.11.2025, trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let applicant, Ravishanker Gandharv, involved in Crime No. 489/2025 registered at Police Station : City Kotwali, District Mungeli (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond 4 with two sureties in the like amount 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 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 sufÏcient 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 sufÏcient 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. 5 8. OfÏce 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 Abhishek