1 CGHC010208772026 2026:CGHC:28667 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 825 of 2026 Praphul Jha S/o Late R. N. Jha Aged About 48 Years Resident Of Bhartiya Nagar, Bilaspur, P. S. Civil Lines, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer/Thana In-charge, Police Station Civil Lines, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Gunjan Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Dy. Advocate General. For Objector : Mr. Shyam Sundar Lal Tekchandani, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2026 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 631/2026 registered at Police Station – Civil Lines, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 of the IPC. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant is having the business of construction and reside at Kantinagar, Bilaspur. The applicant stated that he knows some land which belongs to Smt. Krishna Dua and she is residing presently at Nagpur (MH) and also she gave me Power of Attorney (in short POA). She is an old lady and cannot come to Bilaspur from Nagpur on every occasion and hence the POA had been executed. The complainant also averred that the RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 applicant is looking after the land of Smt. Krishna Dua. The complaint believed on the words of applicant and decided to purchase the land which is situated at the link road towards CMD Chowk to Agrasen Chowk, As per prosecution story the applicant had shown the false and fabricated POA to the complainant and averred that he can execute agreement on the basis of this POA. The registered agreement was executed on dated 26.06.2021 for the property in dispute which is situated at Link Road having Khasra no. 616/2, total admeasure 2600 Square feet and finalize the sale of the land at a rate of Rs. 19,000/- per square feet. The total amount finalized for the same was 19,000 /- X 2600 = 49400000 /- (Rs. Four Crore Ninty Four Thousand Only). The complaint had given an amount of Rs. 20,00,000 (Thirty Lakhs) cash and Rs. 3,00,00,00 (Thirty Lakhs Only) by cheque no. 082556, 082557, 082558, 082559, 411686 and 411687 in between 30.12.2020 to 03.02.2021. The complainant asked the applicant to execute the sale deed and also tried to contact Smt. Krishna Dua but the applicant always procrastinate the matter. The complainant asked applicant to refund the amount then applicant had given his cheque dated 10.04.2026 of Bank of Maharashtra bearing no. 002676 and 002677 of Rs. 5,00,000/- each and said that the complainant will get the same amount when the complainant will place the same cheque in his bank account. The complainant had placed the same cheque which got dishonor due to insufficient funds on dated 16.04.2026 and the same had been conveyed to the applicant over phone and by personal meetings. The complainant also averred that the applicant had not given the reply against cheque dishonor and also stated that after careful perusal of the POA the complainant came to know that the land 3 owner named as Smt. Krishna Dua had given the POA only to take care of the land having Khasra no. 616/2 situated at Link Road and not for the sale of the land. The complainant had also averred that the Civil case is pending before the Civil Judge, Bilaspur in between Smt. Krishna Dua and her Niece and hence the applicant had cheated the complainant which compels him to lodge an FIR. Hence, this application. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the impugned FIR has been lodged after the span of 5 years and the delay has also not been described properly, and there is Absence of Mens Rea as there was no criminal intent to cheat or commit fraud and the dispute is strictly a breach of a civil contract. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 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 materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant, it transpires that impugned FIR has been lodged after the span of 5 years and the delay has also not been described properly, and there is Absence of Mens Rea as there was no criminal intent to cheat or commit fraud and the dispute is strictly a breach of a civil contract, at this stage without 4 expressing any opinion on merits, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Praphul Jha, on executing a personal bond with 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 their adhaar card alongwith a colored 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 themself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Rajshekhar