1 CGHC010170352026 2026:CGHC:28964 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4355 of 2026 • Bhim Kumar Patel S/o- Late Mohan Patel, Aged About 32 Years R/o- Jarve, P S Nagarda, District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus • The State of Chhattisgarh Through, P S Champa, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. F.S. Khare, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sumit Singh, Dy.A.G. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.07.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.144/2026 registered at Police Station : Champa, District - Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, it is alleged that the applicant, Bhim Kumar Patel, falsely represented that he had influence in the Ministry and could secure appointment to the post of Food Inspector for the complainant. On such inducement, the applicant allegedly demanded VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.07.13 18:53:22 +0530 2 a total sum of 15,00,000/-, out of which 7,00,000/- was received from the complainant through bank transfer. It is further alleged that despite the lapse of the stipulated period, the applicant failed to secure the promised employment and did not refund the amount, thereby allegedly cheating the complainant with dishonest intention. On these allegations, an offence under Section 318(4) of the BNS has been registered at Police Station Champa.It is alleged that the applicant, Bhim Kumar Patel, falsely represented that he had influence in the Ministry and could secure appointment to the post of Food Inspector for the complainant. On such inducement, the applicant allegedly demanded a total sum of 15,00,000/-, out of which 7,00,000/- was received from the complainant through bank transfer. It is further alleged that despite the lapse of the stipulated period, the applicant failed to secure the promised employment and did not refund the amount, thereby allegedly cheating the complainant with dishonest intention. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There was no dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction, which is a sine qua non for constituting an offence under Section 318(4) of the BNS, 2023. The applicant has already refunded 2,00,000/- to ₹ the complainant, and the balance amount is subject to mutual settlement, demonstrating his bona fide conduct. Further, by communication dated 10.11.2025 addressed to the Additional Superintendent of Police, District Sakti, the applicant acknowledged the monetary transaction, stated that the amount was taken for household purposes, and expressed his willingness to repay the remaining amount in installments within nine months. A copy of the 3 said communication is annexed herewith as Annexure A/3. He further submits that applicant is in jail since 09.04.2026, and trial may take some time to conclude the trial, charge-sheet has already been filed in this case, therefore applicant is entitled for grant bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that in the present case, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. He further submits that applicant is having one criminal antecedent bearing crime No.1177 of 2021 registered at Police Station – Sarkanda, Bilaspur for offence under Section 294, 506, 341, 384 and 34 of IPC, which is pending for it’s conclusion. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the allegations, the fact that there is no material to prima facie indicate dishonest intention on the part of the applicant at the inception of the transaction, the repayment of ₹2,00,000/- by the applicant, his willingness as reflected in the communication dated 10.11.2025 addressed to the Additional Superintendent of Police, District Sakti, to repay the remaining amount in installments within nine months, and applicant is in jail since 09.04.2026, charge-sheet has been filed, therefore without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for grant of bail 7. Let applicant, Bhim Kumar Patel, involved in Crime No.144/2026 registered at Police Station : Champa, District - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of the 4 Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount 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 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 5 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 forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaishali