1 2026:CGHC:21405 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4244 of 2026 Rakesh Kumar Jangde S/o Domar Singh Jangde Aged About 37 Years R/o Bagtara, Police Station Mandir Hasoud, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station-Balod, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Saxena, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Dr. Sourabh K. Pande, Dy. Adv. General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.05.2026 1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 612/2024 registered at Police Station – Balod, District – Balod (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant, being MCRC No. 9275 of 2025, was rejected by this Court vide order dated 18.11.2025 on the ground of the applicant’s criminal antecedents. 3. As per the prosecution story, the complainant lodged a report before ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.05.08 13:13:14 +0530 2 Police Station Balod, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. It is alleged that the complainant made allegations against the applicant that, in the name of agricultural work and large investments, the applicant induced rural women to form groups and obtain loans from various banks on the assurance of providing commission. It is further alleged that the entire loan amount was withdrawn and retained by the applicant, and the installments of the said loans were not deposited with the banks, thereby cheating the complainant and others to the extent of Rs. 36,13,000/-. On the basis of the said report lodged by the complainant, the concerned police of Police Station Balod investigated the matter and registered Crime No. 612/2024 for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2), and 3(5) of the BNS. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application filed on his behalf, as the first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 18.11.2025 in MCRC No. 9275 of 2025 on the ground of the applicant’s criminal antecedents. He submits that though the applicant has 05 criminal antecedents under the BNS, he has already been granted bail 04 cases by the concerned trial Court. He further submits that there are 246 prosecution witnesses in the present case, and so far, the statements of only 13 prosecution witnesses have been recorded. The applicant has been in custody since 13.03.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application filed on behalf of the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact 3 that this is the second bail application, the earlier one having been rejected on the ground of criminal antecedents, and further considering that out of the 05 criminal antecedents attributed to the applicant, he has already been granted bail in 04 cases by the concerned trial Court, moreover, there are 246 prosecution witnesses cited in the present case, out of which only 13 witnesses have been examined so far, and the applicant has remained in custody since 13.03.2025. In view of the prolonged period of detention and the likelihood that the conclusion of the trial will take considerable time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant. 8. The Second Bail Application of the Applicant – Rakesh Kumar Jangde, involved in Crime No. 612/2024 registered at Police Station – Balod, District – Balod (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his 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 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 his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during 4 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 his, 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 his in accordance with law. 9. 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