1 CGHC010277572026 2026:CGHC:32609 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6838 of 2026 Smt. Dolly Namdev W/o Snehanshu Namdev Aged About 37 Years Resident Of House No. 76, Sai Vilas Parisar, Janjgiri, Charoda Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Supela, Chowki Smriti Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Purnendra Khichariya, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 1137/2025 registered at Police Station AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Supela, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(2), 340(2), 61(2) of BNS and Section 10 of C.G. Protection of Depositors Interest Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Vishwanath Lakhan Mathur, alleged that he was induced to invest in Nisha Business Consultancy and Unique Investment Solution on the assurance of 20% monthly returns on share market investments. Acting on such representations, he initially invested Rs.2,00,000/- and thereafter a further sum of Rs.20,00,000/-. Subsequently, he discovered that the companies had closed their offices and absconded, thereby causing him financial loss. On the basis of the said complaint, the present FIR was registered on 22.09.2025, and after investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that identically situated co- accused, namely, Shubham Kumar Gupta has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07.05.2026 in MCRC No.3408 of 2026. The applicant is in jail since 25.01.2026, the applicant has three criminal antecedents bearing Crime Nos.1123/2023, 137/2025 and 1372/2025, out of which, in case Crime No.1123/2023, applicant has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 02.07.2026 in MCRC No.2994/2026 3 and against Crime No.1372/2025, the applicant has preferred bail application bearing MCRC No.6835/2026, which is listed today, further the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant allegedly in collusion with co-accused, induced the complainant to invest Rs.22,00,000/- on the false promise of 20% monthly returns on share market investments and thereby cheated him. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 25.01.2026, the fact that the applicant allegedly in collusion with co-accused, induced the complainant to invest Rs.22,00,000/- on the false promise of 20% monthly returns on share market investments and thereby cheated him, but considering the fact that identically situated co-accused, namely, Shubham Kumar Gupta has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07.05.2026 in MCRC No.3408 of 2026, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, the 4 applicant has three criminal antecedents bearing Crime Nos.1123/2023, 137/2025 and 1372/2025, out of which, in case Crime No.1123/2023, applicant has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 02.07.2026 in MCRC No.2994/2026 and against Crime No.1372/2025, the applicant has preferred bail application bearing MCRC No.6835/2026, which is listed today and the same is also allowed today itself by this Court, further the charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Smt. Dolly Namdev, involved in Crime No. 1137/2025 registered at Police Station Supela, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(2), 340(2), 61(2) of BNS and Section 10 of C.G. Protection of Depositors Interest Act, be released on bail on her 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 she 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 5 through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, 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 her in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil