1 2026:CGHC:24798 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 883 of 2026 Bhuneshwar Sahu S/o Ganesh Sahu, Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Bharda, P.S. Aarang, District Raipur Chhattisgar ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Shivrinarayan, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Om Prakash Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 18.06.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 553/2025 registered at Police Station – Shivrinarayan, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) & 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant was informed by accused person Bhupendra Sahu who is father of Hitendra Kumar VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.06.19 11:41:48 +0530 2 Sahu (main accused person), that he is engaged in the business of sale and purchase of land and that his son (Hirendra Kumar Sahu) trades in the share market. It was further represented that if the complainant invested some amount, he would receive double the amount invested as returns. Thereafter, the complainant allegedly invested a total sum of Rs. 67,17,000/- through cash as well as online transactions and received a return of Rs. 15,00,000/-. However, as per the allegations, theaccused persons refused to return the remaining amount to the complainant, and therefore the present FIR has been lodged against the Hitendra Kumar Sahu and other accused persons in Crime No. 553/2025, at Police Station Sheorinarayan, for offences District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), punishable under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and only on the basis of memorandum statement, the present applicant has falsely been involved in connection of aforesaid crime. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that no specific allegation has been levelled against the applicant in the FIR and his name does not find mention therein. The applicant has been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of the main accused, which by itself is insufficient to establish his involvement in the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the transaction relating to the subject amount was exclusively between the complainant and co-accused Hirendra Kumar Sahu and Bhupendra Kumar Sahu, who have subsequently returned the entire amount to the complainant. The prosecution has failed to collect any cogent or sufficient material connecting the applicant with the alleged transaction 3 or establishing the ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. It is also submitted that out of the six accused persons involved in the case, five have already been granted bail, including two by this Hon’ble Court and three by the learned Court below, and therefore the applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity. Although the applicant has certain criminal antecedents, he has already been granted bail in four such cases and one anticipatory bail application is pending consideration before the competent Court. It is further submitted that the investigating agency conducted a perfunctory investigation and implicated the applicant merely on suspicion and the memorandum statement of co-accused persons. Since the charge-sheet has already been filed, there is no likelihood of the applicant influencing witnesses, tampering with prosecution evidence, or obstructing the course of justice. The applicant undertakes to cooperate with the trial and reserves his right to raise additional grounds and place further relevant documents before this Hon’ble Court at the time of hearing. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the dispute, and the material available in the case diary, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicants. 4 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Bhuneshwar Sahu, on executing a personal bond and one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) the applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav