1 2026:CGHC:1170 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10375 of 2025 Bhuvnesh Dewangan S/o Late Bhaguwa Ram Aged About 31 Years R/o House No. 682/ K.H. Santoshi Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Gandai District- K.C.G. (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.01.2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 102/2025 registered at Police Station - Gandai, District- K.C.G. (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Earlier first bail application was rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated 14.08.2025 passed in MCRC No. 6447/2025. 3. As per the prosecution story, in brief, the complainant has made written complaint to the concerned police station is that the accused persons have obtained amount of Rs.11,67,900/- from the complainant as installment in several time for providing job but the same has not been PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.01.09 16:13:30 +0530 2 done after lapse of 6 months. Based upon the written complaint, the police has registered the offence under Section 420, 34 of I.P.C. against the accused persons. 4. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that this is the second bail application of the applicant. He further submits that the applicant and the co-accused Bisheshwar Dhruw had taken money from various persons for providing them a job and so far as the status of the trial is concerned, out of 13 prosecution witnesses, 02 prosecution witnesses has been recorded, the applicant has been in jail since 01.05.2025 and it is submitted that he has only one previous criminal antecedent which is pending. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed. He further submits that the first bail application was rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated 14.08.2025 passed in MCRC No. 6447/2025. He also submits that the bail application of the co-accused person, namely, Bisheshwar Dhruw has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 30.06.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4199/2025, further the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent, therefore he is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the applicant and the co-accused Bisheshwar Dhruw had taken money from 3 various persons for providing them a job and so far as the status of the trial is concerned, out of 13 prosecution witnesses, 02 prosecution witnesses has been recorded, the applicant has been in jail since 01.05.2025 and he has only one previous criminal antecedent which is pending, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the applicant - Bhuvnesh Dewangan, involved in Crime No. 102/2025 registered at Police Station - Gandai, District- K.C.G. (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 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 BNS. (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 4 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 BNS. (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 are 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. However, this Court hope and trust that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 10. However, it will be open for the prosecuting agency to initiate prosecution against the complainant of the present case also who claims to have been cheated by the applicant herein as the conduct of the complainant amounts to giving bribe for obtaining employment through illegal mode. 11. 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 Preeti