1 CGHC010282642026 2026:CGHC:32014 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6701 of 2026 1. 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, (C.G.). 2. Dev Narayan Sahu, S/o Late Badriprasad Sahu, Aged About 42 Years R/o. Mahkam Police Chowki Sonakhan Thana Kasdol District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, (C.G.). 3. Tuleshwar Sahu, S/o. Late Badriprasad Sahu, Aged About 34 Years R/o. Mahkam Police Chowki Sonakhan Thana Kasdol District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, (C.G.). 4. Hemant Sahu, S/o Late Badriprasad Sahu, Aged About 40 Years R/o. Mahkam Police Chowki Sonakhan Thana Kasdol District Balodabazar- Bhatapara, (C.G.). 5. Anil Shankar Sahu, S/o Shri Dwarika Prasad Sahu, Aged About 34 Years R/o. Lachanpur, Thana Champa, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Applicants versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Non-applicants For Applicant : Mr. Kamlesh Patel, Advocate. For State/Non-applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 332/2025 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 111 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that a written complaint was lodged by the complainant (Archana Pandey). She alleged that a woman named Lakshmi Patel introduced her to the main accused, Ramnarayan Sahu, in 2022, claiming he was an expert in share marketing. Relying on these assurances, the complainant and her family members allegedly invested approximately Rs.1,44,46,000. These funds were allegedly channelled through investment schemes under the names of "Rana Jewellers" and "DMS Builders". The investment consisted of Rs.74,46,000/- transferred online to various bank accounts and Rs.70,00,000/- delivered in cash. When the complainant demanded the return of her money, the main accused provided a cheque that was subsequently dishonored due to "insufficient funds". Following the allegations of fraud and the realization of financial loss, an FIR was lodged at Police Station Kotwali, District Raigarh, and registered as Crime No. 332/2025 under Sections 318(4), 111 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. 2023. Hence, this application. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that there are 6 criminal cases registered against the applicant No.1(Ramnarayan Sahu), out of which in 5 cases he has been granted bail and against the applicants No.2 to 5 there are 5 criminal cases have been registered out of which, in 4 cases they are on bail. The co-accused persons have already granted anticipatory bail 3 by this Court vide order dated 10.07.2026 and 20.01.2026 in MCRCAs No.847/2026 & 108/2026, and so far as the present case is concerned, the applicants have been implicated only on the basis of the conjectures and surmises reflecting from the memorandum statement of the co-accused. Applicants No.1 to 5 are in jail since 25.06.2025, 08.07.2025, 25.06.2025, 25.06.2025, 05.07.20125, respectively, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicants have criminal cases registered against them and they are habitual offender, therefore, the applicants are not entitled for grant of regular bail in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicants, it transpires that co- accused persons have already granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 10.07.2026 and 20.01.2026 in MCRCAs No.847/2026 & 108/2026, so far as the present case is concerned and the fact that applicants No.1 to 5 are in jail since 25.06.2025, 08.07.2025, 25.06.2025, 25.06.2025, 05.07.20125, respectively, at this stage without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be granted regular bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the instant bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the Applicants – Ramnarayan Sahu, Dev Narayan Sahu, Tuleshwar Sahu, Hemant Sahu and Anil Shankar Sahu involved in Crime No. 332/2025 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 111 4 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 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. (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. 8. 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 Deepti Jha