1 2026:CGHC:6510 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1046 of 2026 1 - Chandrashekhar Sahu S/o Durjan Sahu Aged About 28 Years R/o - Ward No. 19, Bazar Chowk, Bhoring, P/s Tumgaon, District Mahasamund, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P/s Civil Lines, Raipur, C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Vinay Nagdev, Advocate. For Non-applicant/ State : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, G.A. For Complainant : Mr. Prakhar Dutt, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 05-02-2026 1) This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by the applicant before this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No. 76/2021 registered at Police Station–Civil Lines, District–Raipur (C.G.), for the commission of an offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of IPC. NIRMALA RAO 2 2) Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that co-accused - Nandu Joshi impersonated himself as Durjan Sahu and then agreement to sale was executed on 27.4.2016 and the present applicant was a witness to the said agreement. He would submit that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court. He would submit that the applicant is in jail since 21.8.2025 and the charge-sheet has already been filed. He would further submit that out of 14 prosecution witnesses, 11 have already been examined. He would submit that there is no likelihood of early disposal of the trial, therefore, he would pray to allow this application. 3) On the other hand, the learned State counsel would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the applicant. He would submit that there are direct and serious allegations against the applicant and contends that the bail application deserves to be dismissed. 4) Learned counsel appearing for the complainant would fairly submit that the parties have settled their dispute and an agreement to that effect was entered into between the parties on 13.11.2025. It is also informed that the other accused persons have already been enlarged on bail. 5) Taking into consideration the fact that the accused persons and the complainant have already settled the dispute outside the Court, out of 14 witnesses, 11 have been examined and the other co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail, I am inclined to allow this bail application. 3 6) Accordingly, the second bail application filed by the applicant is allowed and it is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, he shall be released on bail, on following conditions :- (i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court, (ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and (iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial, (iv) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. The observations made in the course of this order are only for considering the case of the applicant on the application for grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by the observations made in the course of this order. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi