1 2026:CGHC:25628 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5348 of 2026 Rahul Khande S/o Nandkumar Khande Aged About 27 Years Resident Of Village- Khamhariya P.S. Seepat District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer Police Station Akaltara District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Bharat Lal Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23/06/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 210/2026 registered at Police Station Akaltara, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 112(2) and 3(5) of BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant, namely, Pradeep Kumar Kosle, lodged a report at the concerned Police Station alleging that in the month of January, 2026, he had purchased a JCB machine bearing registration No. CG-10-CC- KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 8743 from Bilaspur. Through one Santosh Lahre of his village and co-accused Sunny Patle, resident of Bamhanin, he came in contact with co-accused Tirithraj Kurre, resident of village Bakarkuda, Masturi. Thereafter, co-accused Tirithraj Kurre represented to the complainant that he would operate the said JCB on rent in Bilaspur and accordingly took the said JCB on rent for a period of one month on agreed monthly rent of Rs.1,40,000/-. It was further agreed that an advance amount of Rs.50,000/- would be paid within two days of execution of the rent agreement. Accordingly, on 31.03.2026, co- accused Tirithraj Kurre took possession of the said JCB. However, on 02.04.2026, the GPS installed in the JCB was switched off. When the complainant tried to contact co-accused Tirithraj Kurre over phone, his mobile phone was found switched off and the GPS location of the JCB was also unavailable, whereas the last available location of the JCB was found to be at Jabalpur. Apprehending that he had been cheated, the complainant lodged a report at the concerned Police Station, on the basis of which Police Station Akaltara registered an offence under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 3(5) and 112(2) of the B.N.S. against the co-accused person and initiated investigation. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that the present applicant/accused Rahul Khande, along with co-accused Tirithraj Kurre, had entered into an agreement with one Santosh Kumar Shyam for purchase of a Mahindra Scorpio bearing registration No. CG-12-AG-1618. The accused persons had assured Santosh Kumar Shyam that a part of the sale consideration would be paid at a later stage, however, after 3 obtaining possession of the vehicle, they neither paid the remaining sale consideration nor contacted him and absconded. In this regard, Santosh Kumar Shyam has submitted a written complaint, which forms part of the case diary. The memorandum statement of the present applicant/accused Rahul Khande further reveals that he had entered into a transaction with one Karan Kumar, S/o Kush Kumar, for purchase of a vehicle bearing registration No. CG-12-A- 5128 for a total consideration of Rs.1,50,000/-. Out of the said amount, he paid Rs.1,00,000/- and issued a cheque of Rs.50,000/- towards the remaining amount. However, the said cheque was dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds in his account. Thereafter, the applicant switched off his mobile phone and failed to clear the outstanding finance amount of the said vehicle. The memorandum statement of the present applicant further discloses that he had also entered into an agreement with one Satilal Markam for purchase of a tractor bearing registration No. CG-10-BU-8653 and had undertaken to pay the finance instalments of the said tractor. However, after taking possession of the tractor, the applicant neither deposited the finance instalments nor paid the agreed amount and switched off his mobile phone with an intention to evade payment. The memorandum statement of the present applicant, as contained in the case diary, further reveals that the present applicant, in connivance with other co-accused persons, dishonestly obtained the complainant's JCB on the pretext of taking the same on rent and subsequently sold the said JCB to co- 4 accused Bharat Gupta. It has also come on record that the applicant and other co-accused persons had, on several occasions, induced different persons to part with their vehicles on the false pretext of taking them on rent or purchasing the same and thereafter failed to make payment. Thus, the material available on record prima facie indicates that the applicant is a habitual offender involved in similar offences. Investigation is still in progress and arrest of co-accused Bharat Gupta is yet to be effected. 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 the applicant has no nexus whatsoever with the incident alleged by the prosecution and has neither cheated nor fabricated any document, as alleged. It is further submitted that the dispute, if any, between the parties is purely of a civil nature arising out of a transaction relating to the JCB machine. He further submits that the transaction regarding the JCB machine was exclusively between the complainant and the main accused, namely, Tirathraj Kurrey, and the present applicant had no role to play in the said transaction. It is further argued that no cogent or incriminating material has been collected by the prosecution against the present applicant and therefore, no prima facie case is made out against him. It is also submitted that the applicant is in judicial custody since 15.04.2026 and has no criminal antecedent and the conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time. It is, therefore, prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for 5 grant of bail and submitted that the present applicant, in connivance with other co-accused persons, had dishonestly induced the complainant to part with his JCB machine on the pretext of taking the same on rent and thereafter sold the said JCB to co-accused Bharat Gupta. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation, it has also surfaced that the applicant was involved in similar transactions with other persons, wherein he had obtained possession of their vehicles on the false assurance of purchase and thereafter failed to make the agreed payments. Learned State counsel further submits that an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- was transferred through PhonePe to the bank account of the applicant's sister, which prima facie indicates the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence. It is also submitted that, although the charge- sheet has been filed, looking to the nature and gravity of the allegations and the conduct of the applicant, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, prayer has been made for rejection of 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, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 15.04.2026 and the fact that in the present case, charge- sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and no further interrogation is required and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am 6 inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant – Rahul Khande, involved in Crime No. 210/2026 registered at Police Station Akaltara, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 112(2) and 3(5) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 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 7 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance.diurt fo forthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal