1 CGHC010213172026 2026:CGHC:28523 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5212 of 2026 Ram Narayan Sahu S/o Surit Ram Sahu Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Bilari, P.S. Shivrinarayan District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station - Kasdol, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 4757 of 2026 1 - Devnarayan Sahu S/o Late Badri Prasad Sahu Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Mahkam Chowki And Tahsil Sonakhan, P.S. Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 2 - Anil Shankar Sahu S/o Dwarika Prasad Sahu Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Lacchanpur, P.S. Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.13 12:44:43 +0530 2 For Applicant(s) : Mr. Kamlesh Patel and Mr. Hardik Jaiswal, Advocates. For Respondent(s) : Dr. Sourabh K. Pande, Dy. Adv. General. For Complainant : Mr. Ravikar Patel, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2026 1. These are the Second bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 470/2025 registered at Police Station – Kasdol, District – Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5), 318(3), 316(5) and 111 of the BNS. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that complainant Rameshwar Kumar Kashyap lodged a written complaint alleging that he came into contact with co-accused Ramnarayan Sahu and Devnarayan Sahu, who represented that they were engaged in share market trading and possessed considerable expertise therein. On the assurance that the invested amount would be doubled within a period of two years, the complainant allegedly invested a total sum of Rs.22,00,000/-, partly by transferring money through net banking into the bank account of Devnarayan Sahu in several instalments and partly in cash. It is alleged that despite repeated demands, neither the promised returns nor the principal amount was refunded, thereby cheating the complainant. On the basis of 3 the said complaint, the police registered the offence and commenced investigation, during which the present applicants were implicated and arrested on 08.07.2025. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the first bail applications filed on behalf of the present applicants were rejected on merits. The present applications are the second bail applications preferred on the ground that following similarly situated co-accused have already been granted anticipatory as well are regular bail by this Court:- S.No. Bail Application No. Name of the Applicant Date of Order 1. MCRCA/250/2026 Ranu Dhruw 13.02.2026 2. MCRC/1922/2026 Chandraprakash 13.03.2026 3. MCRC/3388/2026 Aatma Ram Sahu 06.05.2026 4. MCRC/1669/2026 Diwakar Avsariya 13.03.2026 5. MCRCA/527/2026 Dharnidhar Patel 09.04.2026 6. MCRC/3365/2026 Leeladhar Prasad Sahu 06.05.2026 7. MCRCA/620/2026 Sampat Kumar Sahu 27.04.2026 8. MCRCA/597/2026 Tulsinand Sahu 22.04.2026 9. MCRC/6996/2025 Anita Devi Sahu, Kumar Kusum Rani Sahu 09.10.2025 10. MCRC/9910/2025 Shweta Avsariya 09.12.2025 4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that case of the present applicants is identical to that of the abovementioned co- accused person. So far as criminal antecedents of the applicants is concerned, the same has been explained in para 4(A) and para 4 D of the bail applications and most of them arise out of similar nature of offence, which are being listed before this Court one after another. The applicants are languishing in jail since 08.07.2025 and though the charge-sheet has been filed, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence he prays for grant of bail to the applicants on the ground of parity. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the objector have opposed the bail applications of the present applicants. It is submitted that the present applicants, along with the other co-accused, induced the complainant to invest a substantial amount on the false promise of doubling the investment through share market trading within two years. After receiving the amount, they neither returned the principal nor paid the promised returns, thereby committing the alleged offence. During the course of investigation, sufficient material, including the memorandum statements of the accused persons, was collected against the applicants, pursuant to which they were implicated and arrested. Therefore, it is prayed that the bail applications be rejected. However, learned State counsel could not dispute the fact that abovementioned co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory as well as regular bail by this Court. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 5 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the similarly situated co-accused have already been granted anticipatory as well as regular bail by this Court, the principle of parity is attracted in the present case. Further, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the applicants have been in judicial custody since 08.07.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Without commenting on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow these second bail applications. Accordingly, the applications are allowed. 8. Let the Second bail applications of the Applicants – Ram Narayan Sahu, Devnarayan Sahu and Anil Shankar Sahu, involved in Crime No. 470/2025 registered at Police Station – Kasdol, District – Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5), 318(3), 316(5) and 111 of the BNS, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties (each) in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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. 6 (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously 7 as possible within a period of 01 year from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 10. 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 Abhishek