1 CGHC010165292026 2026:CGHC:28009 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3952 of 2026 Rishal Sarthi S/o Kaushal Prasad Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Devkirari- P.S. Bilha, District Bilaspur C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. - Baloda District Balodabazar - Bhatapara C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Shri Rohishek Verma, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Miss Ritika Verma, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 07/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.151/2026 registered at Police Station Baloda, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence under Section 120- B, 34, 392 and 506 of the IPC. KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.07.08 16:27:33 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution is that the complainant filed a complaint with the concerned Police Station stating that her daughter-in-law had left with her grandchildren because of which her son has died. It is alleged that she informed about her grievance to the accused persons, who lured her to pay money on assurance that they would bring her grandchildren back to her. Being persuaded by the accused persons, the complainant gave Rs.3 lakhs to the accused persons on 27.4.2024, however, the accused persons refused to bring back her grandchildren. On such allegations, FIR was lodged. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. The allegation against the present applicant is that he met the complainant along with co-accused Rajesh and assured her to bring her grandchildren back and thereafter the transaction was done by co-accused Rajesh. There is inordinate delay in filing the FIR, as the offence took place on 27.4.2024 whereas the FIR was lodged on 20.6.2026, and delay in lodging the FIR has also not been explained by the prosecution. Therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that there is inordinate delay in filing the FIR, as the incident occurred on 27.4.2024 whereas the FIR was lodged on 20.6.2026 i.e. after 2 years of the incident, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Rishal Sarthi, involved in Crime No.151/2026 registered at Police Station Baloda, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) for offence under Sections 120-B, 34, 392 and 506 of the IPC , be released on bail on furnishing 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 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. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Barve