1 CGHC010276302026 2026:CGHC:34193 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7123 of 2026 Rakesh Mandal S/o Shri Pulin Mandal Aged About 38 Years R/o Near Nahar Para, Police Station Mana Camp, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Mana Camp, District – Raipur (Rural), Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sharad Prakash Yadav, Advocate appearing through video conferencing, and Mr. Mayur Khandelwal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. Govt. Advocte. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 05.08.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 85/2026, registered at Police Station – Mana Camp, District – Raipur (Rural) (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(2), 61 and 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the case against the applicant is that the complainant, Smt. Kavita Mandal, W/o Sanjeev Mandal, resident of Gautam Chowk, Mana Camp, Raipur, who runs a small fast-food business and is acquainted with the applicant and his wife (co-accused Sarita Mandal) as neighbours, was approached about a year prior to July 2024 by the applicant along with one Punit Singh, RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 who represented that they, through a partnership concern styled "Aishini Homes Pvt. Ltd. - Where Dream Comes True", could arrange a flat for the complainant under the Raipur Development Authority (RDA) housing scheme. It is alleged that upon being so assured, the complainant paid Rs.500/- towards an RDA application on 12.07.2024, Rs.50,000/- to Punit Singh through UPI on 08.07.2024, Rs.50,000/- to the applicant through UPI on 11.07.2024, and a further sum of Rs.5,10,000/- in cash to the applicant, his wife, and Punit Singh jointly on 22.07.2024, purportedly as a 25% premium towards the flat. It is further alleged that the applicant executed a written agreement and issued a cheque of RBL Bank as security, which was subsequently dishonored, and that two further cheques issued by Punit Singh from an HDFC Bank account allegedly contained deliberate errors in figures and words, preventing encashment. On the complainant threatening to lodge a police complaint, it is alleged that the accused persons failed to refund the amount, leading to registration of a Non-Cognizable Report on 08.01.2025 and, eventually, to registration of the impugned FIR pursuant to an order dated 16.03.2026 passed under Section 175(3) BNSS. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. There are two criminal antecedents of the applicant which are pending. It is further submitted that the co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 29.06.2026 and 29.07.2026 passed in MCRCA Nos. 954/2026 and 1202/2026. The applicant is in jail since 24.03.2026 and trial is likely to take quite long 3 time for its conclusion, therefore, on the ground of parity he may be granted bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that there are two criminal antecedents of the applicant which are pending, the co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 29.06.2026 and 29.07.2026 passed in MCRCA Nos. 954/2026 and 1202/2026, and the applicant is in jail since 24.03.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application, on the ground of parity. 7. Let applicant – Rakesh Mandal, involved in Crime No. 85/2026, registered at Police Station – Mana Camp, District – Raipur (Rural) (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(2), 61 and 3(5) of the BNS, be released on bail on his 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 he 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 4 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 through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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 him, 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 him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar