1 2026:CGHC:24964 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 901 of 2026 1 - Shamshad Ansari S/o- Abdul Rehman Ansari Aged About 35 Years R/o- Village Bhawarahi, Post Basdei, Police Station Surajpur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) 2 - Gulshan Parveen W/o- Shamshad Ansari Aged About 30 Years R/o- Village Bhawarahi, Post Basdei, Police Station Surajpur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Patna, District- Koriya (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Sudhanshu Upadhyay, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.06.2026 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 117/2026 registered at Police Station – Patna, District – Koriya (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 120(B) of Indian Penal Code. 2. As per the prosecution story, in March 2024, the complainant came into contact with accused Shamshad Ansari, who allegedly represented that 2 any amount invested with him would be doubled within a period of two years. Believing the said representation and inducement, the complainant obtained a loan of Rs.9,00,000/- from the State Bank of India, Patna Branch, on 21.03.2024. Thereafter, an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- was transferred through RTGS to the bank account of co-accused Gulshan Parveen maintained with the Central Bank of India, Pandopara Branch, while the remaining amount of Rs.2,00,000/- was allegedly paid in cash to the accused persons. It is further alleged that on 10.06.2024, the complainant transferred an additional sum of Rs.37,000/- to accused Shamshad Ansari through PhonePe. It is the case of the prosecution that after nearly one year, when the complainant demanded the return of the invested amount, accused Shamshad Ansari continued to evade repayment by extending false assurances and adopting one pretext or another. Ultimately, the accused persons allegedly refused to return the money. On the basis of the written complaint lodged by the complainant, Police Station Patna registered Crime No. 117/2026 against the accused persons for offences punishable under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicants are husband and wife and were involved in certain other cases, in which they have already been granted bail. Applicant No. 1, Shamshad Ansari, was granted regular bail by this Court in connection with Crime No. 108/2025 vide order dated 17.09.2025 passed in MCRC No. 7272/2025. Applicant No. 2 was granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 25.08.2025 passed in MCRCA No. 1256/2025. It is further submitted that the complainant in the present case was a witness in Crime No. 108/2025 3 and that there exists a monetary dispute between the applicants and the complainant. Learned counsel contends that, on account of the said dispute, the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicants have neither received any amount from any person by deceiving him or her, nor induced or assisted any person to invest any amount. It is also submitted that no amount has been deposited in their bank accounts, nor have they received any cash from any person in connection with the alleged offence. Therefore, learned counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application. He further submits that, apart from the present case, the applicants have two previous criminal antecedents. Therefore, they are not entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the submissions advanced and the material available on record, it appears that the applicants are husband and wife and were involved in certain other cases, in which they have already been granted bail, applicant No. 1, Shamshad Ansari, was granted regular bail by this Court in connection with Crime No. 108/2025 vide order dated 17.09.2025 passed in MCRC No. 7272/2025, applicant No. 2 was granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 25.08.2025 passed in MCRCA No. 1256/2025, further considering the fact that the complainant in the present case was a witness in Crime No. 108/2025 and that there exists a monetary dispute between the applicants and the complainant, further apart from the present case, the applicants have two previous criminal antecedents, this Court is of the view that the 4 applicants has made out a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 – Shamshad Ansari and Gulshan Parveen, respectively on executing a personal bond with one sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The applicants 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 their from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The applicants shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicants shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d)The applicants and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The applicants shall not involved themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti