1 2026:CGHC:26955 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3651 of 2026 Vignesh P. S/o A. Prakash Aged About 29 Years R/o 4/1, 15 Cross 4 Main Road Sampanngirama, Nagar Bangalor South, Wilson Garden Banglor (Karnataka), Current Address Sriniwasa Colony, 33 Sudama Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through -Station House Officer, Police Station Pusour, District – Raigarh, C.G. ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shubham Tripathi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. Govt. Advocate. For Complainant : Ms. Pratibha Sahu, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 01.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 304/2025, registered at Police Station – Pusour, District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of BNS and Section 66D of IT Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that complainant Garun Singh Patel had made a written complaint in Police Station-Pusaur that from 10.10.2025 to 29.10.2025, he received calls from mobile numbers 84349286155, 84362069124 and 8484396806276 informing him that an account has been opened in his name in Mumbai and it is being RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 investigated by CBI, asking him to cooperate, maintain confidentiality, failing which he would be arrested, the amount in his account would be investigated, the amount would be deposited by saying it was CBI account and after investigation it would be verified and returned. Out of fear, he made different payments through UPI, Paytm and RTGS from 10.10.2025 to 29.10.2025 on different dates. Total of 23,28,770/- was deposited in separate accounts and an amount of Rs. 4,20,000/- has been sent to applicants account out of Rs. 23,28,770/-. Hence, this application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant. It is further submitted that out of Rs. 23,28,770/-, the amount which has been deposited to the applicant’s account is Rs.4,20,000/-, and the same has already been returned to the complainant, and the complainant has already admitted the said fact before the trial Court. The applicant is in jail since 01.04.2026 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. Learned counsel for the complainant has raised no objection to the bail application of the applicant, she also admits that the amount deposited in the account of the applicant has already been returned to the complainant. 3 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that out of Rs. 23,28,770/-, the amount which has been deposited to the applicant’s account is Rs.4,20,000/-, and the same has already been returned to the complainant, and the complainant has already admitted the said fact before the trial Court, the applicant is in jail since 01.04.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 8. Let applicant – Vignesh P., involved in Crime No. 304/2025, registered at Police Station – Pusour, District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of BNS and Section 66D of IT Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local 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 4 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 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar