1 CGHC010231152026 2026:CGHC:29074 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5465 of 2026 Gopal Maharaj S/o Late Mahesh Maharaj Aged About 35 Years R/o Ward No. 6 Koriya Colliery, Chirmiri, Police Station And Tahsil Chirmiri, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (M.C.B.) (C.G.) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Chirmiri, District – Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (M.C.B.) (C.G.) --- Non-applicant Along with MCRC No. 5966 of 2026 Gopal Maharaj S/o Late Mahesh Maharaj Aged About 35 Years R/o Ward No. 6, Koriya Colliery, Chirmiri, Police Station And Tahsil Chirmiri, District- Manendragarh, Chirmiri - Bharatpur (M.C.B.) (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Chirmiri, District – Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (M.C.B.) (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ajit Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Dy. Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.07.2026 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 Nos.46/2026 and 47/2026, registered at Police Station – Chirmiri, District – Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) for the offence RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 punishable under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution in MCRC No.5465/2026, is that the complainant Jairam Singh, lodged a written report on 23.01.2026 alleging that on 19.12.2024 the present Applicant arranged a loan of Rs.1,90,000/- in the complainant's name from Punjab National Bank, Haldibadi, purportedly for establishing a hardware shop. It is alleged that the Applicant represented that the loan amount would be transferred to a hardware the wholesaler and thereafter corresponding amount would be paid to the complainant in cash. The Applicant induced the complainant to sign certain documents acknowledging receipt of goods and payment, despite the fact that neither any goods nor any amount was actually received by him. It is also alleged that the Applicant obtained a sum of Rs. 70,000/- from the complainant through PhonePe transactions and assured payment of the remaining amount; however, he ultimately cheated the complainant of Rs.1,50,000/-. The complainant further alleged that two of his friends, namely Vinod Kumar and Vikram Singh, were similarly cheated by the Applicant to the extent of Rs.50,000/- and Rs.4,60,000/-, respectively. On the basis of these allegations, the aforesaid crime has been registered against the present Applicant. Hence, this application. 3. The case of the prosecution in MCRC No.5966/2026, is that on 23.01.2026, the complainant Vikram Singh lodged a written report alleging that the present Applicant introduced himself as an agent of Punjab National Bank, was well Haldibadi Branch, claiming that he acquainted with the concerned bank officials. It is alleged that the Applicant obtained all the credentials and documents of the 3 complainant and subsequently informed him on 25.07.2024 that his loan had been sanctioned. The Applicant also obtained signed cheques and other documents from the complainant. Relying upon the false assurances of the Applicant that he would repay the loan installments, the complainant consented to the loan process. Although the Applicant paid a few installments initially, he thereafter stopped making any payments. The complainant alleges that while he was made to believe that a loan of Rs.50,000/- was being sanctioned, the Applicant fraudulently procured a loan of Rs.4,60,000/- in the complainant's name, the proceeds of which were never received by the complainant. Thus, the Applicant is alleged to have cheated the complainant. Hence, this application. 4. 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 are a total of 5 cases registered against the applicant beside the present cases, and out of them only one is pending. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 09.04.2026 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there are a total of 5 cases registered against the applicant beside the present cases, out of them only one is pending, the charge-sheet has been filed in this case, and the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the 4 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 there are a total of 5 cases registered against the applicant beside the present cases, and out of them only one is pending, the charge-sheet has been filed in this case, the applicant is in jail since 09.04.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 8. Let applicant – Gopal Maharaj, involved in Crime Nos.46/2026 and 47/2026, registered at Police Station – Chirmiri, District – Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the BNS, 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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (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 fails to appear before the court on 5 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