1 CGHC010208522026 2026:CGHC:28523 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4963 of 2026 Ramnarayan Sahu S/o Late Badriprasad Sahu Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Mahkam, Chauki And Tahsil Sonakhan, P.S. Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 4754 of 2026 Gulshan Kumar Sahu S/o Ramnrayan Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Mahkam Chowki And Tehsil- Sonakhan Ps Kasdol District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kasdol District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Kamlesh Patel, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Dr. Sourabh K. Pande, Dy. Adv. General. For Complainant : Mr. Ravikar Patel, Advocate. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.13 15:03:57 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2026 1. The applicants have preferred the first Bail Applications under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as they 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), 316(5), 318(3), 3(5) and 111 of the BNS. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that complainant Rameshwar Kumar Kashyap lodged a written complaint alleging that on 04.04.2024, when he met Ramnarayan Sahu and Devnarayan Sahu at Kasdol, they represented that they, along with other associates, were engaged in share market trading and possessed considerable expertise therein. They allegedly induced the complainant to invest money on the assurance that the invested amount would be doubled within two years. Believing their representations, the complainant transferred different amounts through net banking to the bank account of Devnarayan Sahu and, in all, invested a total sum of Rs.22,00,000/-. Thereafter, when the promised returns were not paid and the invested amount was allegedly not refunded, the complainant accused the applicants and other co-accused of cheating him. On the basis of the said complaint, the police 3 registered the offence and commenced investigation, during which the present applicants were implicated and arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the crime which never committed by them. There is no prima facie evidence available on record to show the involvement of present applicants in the crime in question. Further, following co-accused persons have already been granted 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) of the bail applications and most of them arise out of present crime. The 4 applicant-Gulshan Kumar Sahu is languishing in jail since 08.07.2025 and applicant-Ramnarayan Sahu is languishing in jail since 12.08.2025 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. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application of the applicants and also the submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicants, but could not dispute the fact that abovementioned co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court and the case of the present applicants is identical to that of the co-accused person. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant opposes the bail applications and submits that the applicants, in connivance with the other accused persons, induced the complainant to invest a substantial amount of Rs.22,00,000/- on the false assurance of doubling the investment within two years and thereafter dishonestly misappropriated the amount. It is contended that the applicants played an active role in the commission of the offence, the allegations are serious in nature involving cheating and criminal breach of trust, and if released on bail, they may influence the prosecution witnesses or hamper the trial. It is, therefore, prayed that both the bail applications be dismissed. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 5 8. 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, applicant-Gulshan Kumar Sahu is languishing in jail since 08.07.2025 and applicant-Ramnarayan Sahu is languishing in jail since 12.08.2025, charge-sheet has already been filed and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, as such, the Court is of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the bail application of the applicants is allowed. 9. Let applicants, Gulshan Kumar Sahu and Ramnarayan 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), 316(5), 318(3), 3(5) and 111 of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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. 10. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall 7 make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously 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. 11. 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 Abhishek