1 CGHC010290912026 2026:CGHC:32945 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1198 of 2026 Satyendra Kumar Jangde S/o Shri Ramdas Jangde, Aged About 45 Years R/o Rajendra Prasad Nagar, Korba, Tehsil And District Korba C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Pali District Korba C.G ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, 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.142/2025 registered at Police Station – Pali District Korba C.G (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 420 of the IPC. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 18/04/2025 the complainant namely Hriday Lal Yadav has lodged a written report before Police Station Pali District Korba (C.G.) against the applicant stating that the applicant who is In-charge of Support India Programme, West Bengal VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.31 10:47:46 +0530 2 Company. Asansol, that the applicant run Support India Programme NGO, in which company produce various types of products and teach our members free of cost. Our company has taught hand wash, toilet cleaner and bathroom cleaner and other products in which complainant deposit Rs.91,000/-, he will get monthly salary of Rs.18-20 thousand per month. On 19/06/2024 the complainant has deposited Rs.91,000/- through phone pay in company account. When complainant asked the applicant to return the said amount, applicant told that if the company return the money then applicant will return but till date he has not returned the said amount. Therefore police has lodged FIR before P.S. Pali which was registered as Crime No.142/2025 for offence U/S 420 of I.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the complainant had transferred an amount of Rs.91,000/- through Phone Pe to the applicant, which was thereafter deposited by the applicant in the account of the concerned company. The company subsequently issued a letter dated 20.05.2025 acknowledging receipt of the said amount and also issued a cheque bearing No.000802 drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank in favour of the complainant. It is further submitted that the complainant was himself a member of the said company and was allotted ID No. SICT134981, and the company had also issued a Certificate of Achievement in his favour. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant had no personal role in the alleged monetary transaction and had not cheated the complainant nor retained any amount for himself. It is also submitted that the applicant had deposited the amount in the company account, for which the 3 company issued a Certificate of Achievement bearing ID No. SICT522466 in his favour. It is further contended that the FIR was lodged after an unexplained delay of about eight months, which indicates that the applicant has been falsely implicated with an ulterior motive to harass him. The applicant had no prior knowledge regarding registration of the FIR and, immediately upon coming to know of the same, approached this Court by filing the present anticipatory bail application. Learned counsel submits that the dispute is essentially civil/commercial in nature and has unnecessarily been given a criminal colour. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, and he is ready to abide by any condition that may be 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. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for both parties, the nature of the dispute, and the material available on record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. 4 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Satyendra Kumar Jangde, on executing a personal bond and one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) 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. (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) the applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav