1 CGHC010273132026 2026:CGHC:31476 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6617 of 2026 Horilal Pankaj S/o Shri Lalit Pankaj, Aged About 36 Years R/o Housing Board Colony, Vidhan Sabha, Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S. H. O. Police Station - Pandri, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ramesh Nayak, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Deputy Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 23.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 101/2026, registered at Police Station - Pandri, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 204 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. According to the prosecution case, the complainant, Krishna Rao, a resident of BSUP Colony, Daldal Seoni, who is employed as a delivery boy with Zomato, lodged a written complaint alleging that, about six PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.07.23 17:48:47 +0530 2 months prior to the registration of the FIR, while delivering an order, he came into contact with the present applicant, who introduced himself as a loan agent. The present applicant allegedly assured the complainant that he could arrange a loan for him and thereafter introduced him to the co-accused, Jitesh Chandrakar, as another loan agent. It is alleged that, on the pretext of processing the loan, the complainant was induced to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- in cash towards documentation charges. Thereafter, in furtherance of their common intention, the present applicant and the co-accused allegedly procured loans amounting to Rs. 27,50,000/- from various banks in the name of the complainant without his knowledge or consent and dishonestly withdrew and misappropriated the loan amount, thereby cheating the complainant. On the basis of the said complaint, the present crime was registered against the applicant and the co-accused for the aforesaid offences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the co-accused, namely, Jitesh Kumar Chandrakar has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 6017/2026. He also submits that the present applicant has two previous criminal antecedents under the IPC. He submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has been in jail since 18.04.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant but could not dispute the fact that similarly situated co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court. He submits that 3 the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant has two previous criminal antecedents. Therefore, it is contended that the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and further the co-accused, namely, Jitesh Kumar Chandrakar has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 6017/2026, the present applicant has two previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has been in jail since 18.04.2026, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant – Horilal Pankaj, involved in Crime No. 101/2026, registered at Police Station - Pandri, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 204 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two 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 4 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 such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against his, 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. 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 Preeti