1 CGHC010300792026 2026:CGHC:34561 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No.1263 of 2026 Banshidhar Ram Yadav S/o Guruvaru Ram Yadav Aged About 65 Years R/o Raikera, Police Station Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh (As Per F I R) Annexure A/2 ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06.08.2026 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the Applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.164/2026 registered at Police Station – SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.08.07 15:22:08 +0530 2 Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 318(2), 336, 338, 339 and 61(2)(a) of BNS. 2. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that complainant Bhagwano Ram had purchased 1.06 acres of land comprised in Khasra No.49/4 from the present Applicant by a registered sale deed executed in the year 2010, pursuant to which the Tahsildar, by order dated 15.05.2012, directed mutation of the land in the complainant's name. It is alleged that although the Applicant unsuccessfully challenged the mutation order before the Sub-Divisional Officer and thereafter instituted Civil Suit No.05-A/2015, which was dismissed on 15.09.2017, the complainant's name was not reflected in the revenue records. Taking advantage of the said omission, the Applicant is alleged to have executed registered sale deeds dated 13.07.2022 and 18.10.2024 in favour of Leeladhar and Parmanand in respect of a portion of the same land measuring 0.627 acres, whereupon their names were entered in the revenue records. Thereafter, the complainant preferred mutation proceedings before the Sub-Divisional Officer, who, by order dated 04.06.2026, allowed the Appeal and directed the Tahsildar to lodge a report against the present Applicant and others. Based on these allegations, the offences as mentioned above have been registered against the present 3 Applicant. Hence, this application. 3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature and arises out of a long-standing land dispute and mutation proceedings. It is further submitted that although the complainant claims to have purchased a portion of the land in the year 2010, his name was never reflected in the revenue records and the name of the present Applicant continued to be recorded as the recorded tenure-holder. He further submits that acting under a bona fide belief based on the existing revenue entries, the Applicant executed the subsequent sale deeds in favour of his son and nephew, namely Leeladhar and Parmanand, without any dishonest or fraudulent intention. It is further submitted that prior to the execution of the sale deeds, the Applicant verified the revenue records, which continued to reflect his name and therefore the essential ingredients of the offence of cheating are not made out. It is also submitted that the mutation in favour of Leeladhar and Parmanand has already been set aside in the revenue proceedings and the Applicant has not attempted to retain possession of the disputed land thereafter. He further submits that the direction issued by the 4 Sub-Divisional Officer for registration of the FIR in mutation proceedings is without jurisdiction and that the complainant himself had never lodged any criminal complaint against the Applicant. It is lastly submitted that co-accused Leeladhar Ram Yadav has already been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 14.07.2026 passed in MCRCA No.1092/2026 and therefore, the present Applicant is also entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the application. 5. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the material available in the case diary, the nature of allegations, the fact that the dispute arises out of a transaction relating to immovable property, the Applicant claims to have executed the subsequent sale deeds under a bona fide belief that his name continued to be reflected in the revenue records, the mutation in favour of the subsequent purchasers has already been set aside in the revenue proceedings, the dispute appears to be predominantly civil in nature, co-accused Leeladhar Ram Yadav has already been granted the benefit of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 14.07.2026 passed in MCRCA No.1092/2026 and the present Applicant is similarly situated and entitled to claim 5 parity, the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion and without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. 6. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the Applicant – Banshidhar Ram Yadav, on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The Applicant/s 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/her/them from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The Applicant/s shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicant/s shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him/her/them by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d)The Applicant/s and the surety shall submit a copy of his/her/their adhaar card along with a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicant/s shall not involve himself/herself/themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Priya