1 2026:CGHC:26949 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 929 of 2026 Utsav Bhosle S/o Kusumakar Aged About 32 Years R/o Geetanjali Apartment Sindhi Colony, Jarhabhata, Police Station Civil Line And District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Civil Line District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 01.07.2026 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. 456/2026 registered at Police Station - Civil Line, District - Bilaspur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 211, 34, 467, 468, 120-B, 201 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, in brief is that the accused Dipendra Padhi along with co-accused Kusumakar Rao Bhosle approached RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 the complainant and sought financial assistance for their business. Owing to their cordial and friendly relations, the complainant allegedly advanced a loan of Rs.20,00,000/- to them on 15.07.2017, whereafter both the accused executed a loan agreement in favour of the complainant on 18.07.2017. Thereafter, on 24.01.2018, the accused persons allegedly requested the complainant to advance an additional loan of Rs.1,00,00,000/- in cash for business purposes. When the complainant insisted upon execution of a fresh agreement in respect of the enhanced loan amount, the accused persons allegedly stated that they had to leave immediately for Raipur and, instead of executing a fresh agreement, made necessary corrections in the earlier agreement and signed the same acknowledging the receipt of the additional loan amount. It is further alleged that during the period from 2021 to 2022, the accused persons repeatedly obtained further financial assistance from the complainant, and the total amount allegedly advanced by the complainant reached Rs.3,15,00,000/-. Thereafter, on 03.07.2024, the accused persons executed a final agreement at Raipur acknowledging the outstanding liability and also issued cheques towards repayment of the loan amount. However, upon presentation, the said cheques were dishonoured by the bank on account of insufficient funds. Thereafter, the complainant submitted a written complaint before the concerned Police Station as well as the Superintendent of Police, however, no action was taken on the ground that the dispute pertained to a monetary transaction of civil nature. Consequently, the complainant filed an application under 3 Section 175(3) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 before the learned JMFC, Bilaspur, seeking a direction for registration of an FIR against the accused persons for offences punishable under Sections 420 and 211 of the IPC. The learned JMFC, vide order dated 01.04.2026, allowed the application and directed the concerned Police Station to register the FIR and investigate the matter. Pursuant thereto, the FIR was registered against both the accused initially under Sections 420 and 211 of the IPC, and during the course of investigation, Sections 467, 468, 120- B, 201 and 34 of the IPC were also added. Hence, the present anticipatory bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the investigation against the principal accused persons has already been completed and the charge- sheet has been filed against co-accused Dipendra Padhi and Kusumakar Rao Bhosle. He further submits that the applicant is neither a partner nor connected in any manner with the firm ‘R.K.B. Tech’ and has been arrayed as an accused solely on account of being the son of co-accused Kusumakar Rao Bhosle. It is argued that the applicant has no direct or indirect role in the alleged transactions or the commission of the alleged offences and no material has been collected during the investigation to establish his involvement. It is further submitted that the applicant is residing separately with his family, is engaged in his own business, has a good reputation and standing in society, and has no criminal 4 antecedents. It is also contended that co-accused persons, namely, Dipendra Padhi and Kusumakar Rao Bhosle have already been enlarged on regular bail by this Hon’ble Court vide orders dated 15.05.2026 and 16.06.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. Nos. 4662/2026 and 4663/2026 respectively, and similarly situated co-accused person, namely, Smt. Rashmi Bala Bhosle has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 19.06.2026 passed in MCRCA No. 910/2026, therefore, on the ground of parity, the present applicant is also entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case that in the present case, further the fact that the bail application of the similarly situated accused persons, namely, Dipendra Padhi and Kusumakar Rao Bhosle have already been enlarged on regular bail by this Court vide orders dated 15.05.2026 and 16.06.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. Nos. 4662/2026 and 4663/2026 respectively, and co- accused person, namely, Smt. Rashmi Bala Bhosle has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 19.06.2026 passed in MCRCA No. 910/2026. Therefore, at this stage without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court is of the 5 view that the applicant is also entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Utsav Bhosle on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The applicant 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) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicant 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 her 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) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan