1 CGHC010189022026 2026:CGHC:28547 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4437 of 2026 Sunita Gujrati W/o Ravi, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Saidpur Khash Karya Hada, Kareli P.O. G.T.B. Nagar, Distt. Prayagraj, U.P. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Kotwali, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Akhat Kumar Yadav, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2026 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 – Kotwali Ambikapur, District – Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant namely Md. Hasib Khan lodged written report before the Police Station Kotwali, PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.07.10 17:42:11 +0530 2 Ambikapur, stating that the present applicant along with other caucused have committed dishonest and fraudulent intent, induced the complainant to believe that certain small pieces of metal were genuine gold, whereas in fact they were made of brass, and thereby dishonestly cheated the complainant and caused wrongful loss to the tune of ₹21,00,000. Thereafter the police of police station Kotwali Ambikapur registered a case as Crime No. 151/2026 offence punishable under 318 (4), 61(2), 3(5) of B.N.S. 2023 against the present applicant along with other co-accused. Thereafter the present applicant has been arrested by the police of police station Kotwali Ambikapur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that co-accused person, namely, Manju Rathore, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 01.07.2026 passed in MCRC No.5794/2026. He further submits that applicant has a 3 months child and she is in jail since 19.03.2026. It is further submitted that applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, and that the charge-sheet has been filed, and further, the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, it is prayed that applicant may be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that charge-sheet has been filed in the present case but could not dispute the fact that the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case-diary. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence levelled against the present applicant, and the fact that co-accused person, namely, Manju Rathore, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 01.07.2026 passed in MCRC No.5794/2026, the charge-sheet has been filed, further inspite of the time granted to the State counsel calling for the criminal antecedents from the State of Uttar Pradesh, the same has not been produced, the applicant is in jail since 19.03.2026, and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let applicant, Sunita Gujrati, involved in Crime No. 151/2026, registered at Police Station – Kotwali Ambikapur, District – Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’), be released on bail on furnishing 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 during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and 4 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti