1 CGHC010214212026 2026:CGHC:28684 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5068 of 2026 1 - Pankaj Kumar Verma S/o Late Ramanand Verma Aged About 39 Years R/o Vill - Tikiya, Post - Bohribandh, Rewa, P.S. - Chaurhata, Distt - Rewa, (M.P.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - P.S.- City Kotwali Bilaspur, Dist - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Dy. A.G. For Objector : Mr. Satyendra Shrivas, Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 159/2025 registered at Police Station- City Kotwali Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420, 34 of IPC. 2. As per the prosecution case, in brief, the applicant, claiming to be the Director of Regal Bhawan Nirmaan and Infrastructure Limited Company, allegedly induced the complainant and other villagers to act as agents of the company and invest money therein by assuring them of lucrative returns. Acting on such inducement, the complainant allegedly invested money in the company; however, neither the promised returns nor the invested amount was paid back, thereby causing wrongful loss to the investors. On the basis of the said allegations, the present crime was registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the entire amount alleged to have been invested by the complainant has since been refunded and the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, has been in judicial custody since 30.04.2026, the investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has been filed, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that sufficient material has been collected during the investigation to connect the applicant with the commission of the offence. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, it is prayed that the bail application be rejected. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the objector submits that the entire amount due has been received from the applicant and that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, considering the rival submissions, the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, has been in judicial custody since 30.04.2026, the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed, and further taking note of the submission made by learned counsel for the objector that the entire amount has been received and the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties, this Court is of the opinion that further pre-trial detention of the applicant is not warranted. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. Consequently, the bail application is allowed. 4 8. Let the Applicant – Pankaj Kumar Verma involved in Crime No.- 159/2025 registered at Police Station- City Kotwali Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420, 34 of IPC. 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 his 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 5 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously from the receipt 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 Ruchi