1 2026:CGHC:25715 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5488 of 2026 1 - Toshram Sahu S/o Lt. Govind Ram Sahu Aged About 58 Years R/o Village Chakarda Ps Madhaibhatha Thana And Tehsil Sarsiva District- Sarangarh Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh ... Applicant (s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer Police Station Sarsiva District- Sarangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant (s) : Mr. Aman Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mrs. Shailja Shukla, GA. Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu , J Order On Board 23/06/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this application for grant of bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime/FIR No.131/2024 registered at Police Station Sarsiwa, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh for offence under Sections 420, 409, 406, 120-B/34 of the IPC and under KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.06.24 15:26:50 +0530 2 Sections 6 & 10 of the CG Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005. 2. This is the 3rd bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to repeat the prayer after filing of the charge sheet vide order dated 9.4.2026 passed in MCRC No.3204/2026 and the second bail application was also dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 15.5.2026 passed in MCRC No.3574/2026. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that co-accused Brinda Sahu contacted complainant Saurabh Agrawal, Vishwajit Khandekar, Tarun Sahu, Deepak Agrawal, Kamal Pradhan and informed them that as per scheme, one Shiva Sahu accepts the deposit of amount and return back double the amount within 8 months and monthly return of the amount at the rate of 30%. Relying upon the words of co-accused Brinda Sahu, the complainant approached the said Shiva Sahu, had a discussion with him and thereafter as per Whatsapp chat, they handed over an amount of Rs.2 crores in cash to Jhagesh Sahu. However, after some time, when they realized that they had been cheated, report was lodged. Subsequently, one other complaint was also lodged by Devki Sahu that she had also handed over some amount to this applicant to be deposited with the firm namely, ‘Shiva with Journey’, on the assurance of the applicant that the amount will be enhanced by two and half times within a period of 8 months. 3 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime and he has not committed any offence. In the initial complaint lodged by one Saurabh Agrawal based on which crime No.131/2024, which is the subject matter of this bail application, was registered, the applicant was not named. The crime was initially registered against Shiva Sahu and other persons. The said Shiva Sahu was enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.3.2025 passed in MCRC No.8993/2024. Similarly, many other co- accused persons have also been released on bail. He contended that from the contents of the charge sheet, it appears that Shiva Sahu was the main accused, who has already been enlarged on bail. The applicant is in jail since 17.3.2026, charge sheet has also been filed after completion of the investigation and no purpose would be served in keeping the applicant in jail, therefore, the applicant may also be granted benefit of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel would oppose the bail application on submission that there is specific allegation against the present applicant that he procured/collected the money from complainant Devki Sahu on the ground that more than double amount would be returned within a period of 8 months. Learned State Counsel however does not dispute the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant that Shiva Sahu and other co- accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court. On putting specific query with 4 regard to criminal antecedents of the applicant, learned State Counsel informs that the applicant does not have any criminal antecedents. 6. On due consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations and further considering that Shiva Sahu and some other co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail and that trial may take some time for disposal and without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Accordingly, the Application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court 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 5 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 (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge, and (c) 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Barve