1 CGHC010279732026 2026:CGHC:32971 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1205 of 2026 Vikrant Karan Kuldeep S/o Balkaran Kuldeep Aged About 27 Years R/o House No. 13, Katinda, Pahad Amorni, Surajpur, District- Surajpur, C.G.-497235 ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Office, P.S. Farasgaon Thana, District- Kondagaon, C.G. ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pushp Kumar Gupta, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 30.07.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.52/2026 registered at Police Station - Farasgaon Thana, District- Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offences punishable VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.31 17:25:52 +0530 2 under Sections 318(4), 112, 3(5), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 61(2) of the BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on the basis of a written complaint lodged by the complainant before Police Station Farsagaon, District Kondagaon (C.G.), Crime No. 52/2026 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2), 318(4), 112 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It is alleged that the complainant, who is working as a Teacher in Government Upper Primary School, Madkada, was previously acquainted with one Virendra Tirkey, who allegedly facilitated sanction of loans in favour of the complainant from various banks. It is further alleged that, after sanction of the said loans, approximately 60-65% of the sanctioned loan amount was withdrawn from the respective loan accounts and an aggregate amount of Rs.27,80,000/- was credited into the complainant's salary account, which was thereafter allegedly transferred by the said Virendra Tirkey into the bank accounts of various persons, including the named accused persons. As per the further allegation, pursuant to an agreement between the complainant and Virendra Tirkey, the accused persons had undertaken to discharge the entire liability arising out of the loans after receiving the loan proceeds. Initially, substantial amounts were allegedly deposited back into the complainant's account in instalments; however, subsequently, the loan instalments were directly debited from his account and the 3 monthly deductions exceeded his salary, resulting in financial loss and mental distress to the complainant. The prosecution, therefore, alleges that the accused persons, including the present applicant, in furtherance of their common intention, induced and assisted the complainant in obtaining loans from various banks, caused a substantial portion of the loan proceeds to be withdrawn and transferred into the accounts of different persons, and thereby cheated the complainant and caused him financial loss. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a bare perusal of the FIR itself reveals that the complainant had voluntarily obtained loans from various financial institutions in his own name and thereafter transferred approximately 60-65% of the loan proceeds to his own bank account and, on his own volition, transferred an aggregate amount of Rs.27,80,000/- to the accounts of various individuals and business entities, whereas the FIR does not attribute any specific overt act, inducement, misrepresentation or active involvement to the present applicant in the sanction or disbursement of the said loans. It is further submitted that the applicant is the proprietor of “Vikrant Enterprises”, a duly registered business establishment engaged in the lawful business of construction materials, and that in December, 2024, upon the representation of one Dilip Soni that certain amounts were recoverable from the complainant, the complainant transferred Rs.18,00,000/- into the applicant’s bank 4 account through regular banking channels, which amount was thereafter transferred by the applicant, acting upon the instructions of Dilip Soni, to Aadhi Enterprises and certain other persons towards purported business transactions; the applicant had neither any independent dealings with the complainant nor any knowledge regarding the source of the funds or the alleged loan transactions. Learned counsel further submits that the FIR itself does not disclose that the applicant had played any role in procuring or facilitating the sanction of the loans or had made any representation to the complainant or any financial institution, and therefore the essential ingredient of cheating, namely fraudulent or dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction, is conspicuously absent. It is also submitted that all the transactions were carried out voluntarily through lawful banking channels pursuant to an arrangement between the complainant and the other accused persons and that the dispute, if any, essentially arises out of a commercial and financial arrangement and has subsequently been given a criminal colour. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is suffering from serious physical ailments and has remained under continuous medical treatment and hospitalization, as supported by the medical documents filed on record. It is lastly submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, is a permanent resident, has deep roots in society, is the sole earning member of his family, and there is no likelihood of his absconding, tampering with 5 prosecution evidence or influencing witnesses; he is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and abide by all the terms and conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court. On these grounds, learned counsel prays that the applicant may kindly be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that there are specific allegations against the present applicant regarding his involvement in the alleged conspiracy and cheating, whereby substantial loan amounts were transferred into the accounts of the accused persons. It is further submitted that the investigation is still in progress and that the present applicant has three criminal antecedents. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the amount involved, the stage of investigation, the specific role attributed to the applicant, and his three criminal antecedents, this Court is not inclined to extend the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the rival submissions, perused the case diary and the material available on record, this Court finds that there are specific allegations regarding the involvement of the accused persons in obtaining loans from various banks and transferring substantial portions of the loan amounts into different bank 6 accounts, thereby causing financial loss to the complainant. The allegations against the present applicant are serious in nature and involve substantial financial transactions. The investigation is still in progress. Further, the applicant has criminal antecedents involving similar offences, namely, Crime Nos. 38/2026 and 39/2026 registered at Police Station Keshkal and Crime No. 51/2026 registered at Police Station Farsgaon. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the financial loss caused to the complainant, the criminal antecedents of the applicant, and the stage of investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Vikrant Karan Kuldeep, involved in Crime No.52/2026 registered at Police Station - Farasgaon Thana, District- Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 112, 3(5), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 61(2) of the BNS, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav