1 2026:CGHC:24098 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3497 of 2026 Vishwajeet Devnath S/o Shri Jitendra Devnath Aged About 43 Years R/o. Itla, Porapara, Kalirhat, District- Nadia (West Bengal) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- District- Magistrate, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy.G.A. For complainant : Shri Kishore Narayan, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/06/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.35/2026 registered at Police Station Champa, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34, 409 and 406 of the IPC. GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2026.06.17 17:03:55 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Dhudhan Prasad Dewangan, lodged FIR No. 35/2026 alleging that during the period from 01.02.2022 to 15.06.2024, the present applicant and co- accused persons induced him and other investors to invest money in an LED manufacturing business and subsequently in another firm, namely "Nikki Enterprises", on the assurance of a return of 5% per month. Initially, profits and bonuses were paid, thereby gaining the confidence of investors. Thereafter, the applicant allegedly invested the collected funds in share trading and, upon suffering losses, stopped making payments and failed to return the invested amounts. During investigation, the Police collected documents, recorded witness statements and memorandum statements of the accused persons, and found that several persons had invested money through the complainant. Accordingly, offences under Sections 420 and 34 of the IPC were registered against the applicant and other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the dispute arises out of a business transaction and loan agreements executed between the parties, and therefore, the matter is purely civil in nature. He would submit that the complainant and other investors voluntarily invested money in the duly registered company and received profits for about 12 to 14 months, which shows that there was no dishonest intention from the beginning. It is further submitted that the complainant himself played an active role in introducing investors and was involved in the business activities. The FIR has been lodged after an unexplained delay of about one and a half years and no 3 specific amount of cheating has been attributed to the applicant. He would submit that the charge sheet has been filed in this case, the applicant is in jail since 07/02/2026 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel as also learned counsel for the complainant oppose the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel for the parties, materials available on record, nature of allegation levelled against the applicant, period of detention of the applicant since 07/02/2026, charge sheet has been filed and also considering the fact that trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the Applicant- Vishwajeet Devnath, involved in Crime No.35/2026 registered at Police Station Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34, 409 and 406 of the IPC, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local 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 4 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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri