1 CGHC010329992026 2026:CGHC:38378 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No.1417 of 2026 Janardan Netam S/o Ravi Netam Aged About 26 Years R/o - Goharaparad, Tehsil Amlipadar, Police Station - Devbhog, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The S.H.O. - Mandir Hasaud, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 31.08.2026 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 SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.09.01 11:35:58 +0530 2 with Crime No.15/2025 registered at Police Station – Mandir Hasaud, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 3(5) of BNS. 2. As per the case of prosecution, complainant Smt. Praveen Agrawal lodged a written report alleging that she had entered into an agreement on 13.12.2024 to purchase about five acres of land belonging to Pushpa Sarathi, situated at Mandir Hasaud, Mana Camp Road, near a petrol pump. On 20.12.2024, she, along with her husband, sister-in-law and witnesses, went to the Registry Office at Nava Raipur for execution of the sale deeds in the joint names of herself and Smt. Sangeeta Agrawal. Two sale deeds were agreed to be executed for Rs.96,00,000/- and Rs.1,21,00,000/- respectively. A woman was introduced to the complainant by Anurag Shrivastava and Murli Gajwani as the landowner Pushpa Sarathi and she represented herself to be the owner of the land. Towards the consideration of the first sale deed, cheques amounting to Rs.96,00,000/- were issued in favour of Pushpa Sarathi, out of which Rs.48,00,000/- was paid by the complainant and Rs.48,00,000/- by Smt. Sangeeta Agrawal, which amount was subsequently transferred to the bank account of Pushpa Sarathi on 27.12.2024. For the second sale deed, post-dated cheques totaling 3 Rs.1,21,00,000/- were issued, following which the sale deed was executed and the woman introduced as Pushpa Sarathi signed as the seller. Thereafter, the documents were submitted for mutation through the Patwari, Mandir Hasaud, and the period for inviting objections was fixed up to 16.01.2025. On 09.01.2025, the complainant's husband, upon making inquiries at Mandir Hasaud, came to know that no such person as Pushpa Sarathi existed and that the woman who had executed the sale deed was allegedly a fake person whose actual name was Devanti Verma. It is further alleged that Murli Gajwani and Vikram Singh Patel had facilitated the transaction and that Ruknuddin Khan and Satish Sinha of Birgaon, in connivance with the said woman, had prepared forged documents and got the sale deed executed by impersonating the actual landowner, thereby cheating the complainant. Based on these allegations, the offences as mentioned above have been registered against the present Applicant and the co-accused persons. Hence, this application. 3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he is not named in the FIR and has no role in the alleged offence. It is submitted that the only allegation 4 against the present Applicant is that he had introduced the parties and accompanied some of the co-accused persons, whereas he neither prepared or signed any forged document, impersonated any person, nor received any amount or had any financial transaction with the complainant or other parties and was completely unaware of the alleged fraudulent transaction. It is further submitted that co-accused Vikram Singh Patel and Anurag Shrivastava, against whom similar allegations have been levelled, have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 19.03.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.A. No.384/2025 and 02.05.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.A. No.634/2025 respectively. It is also submitted that the name of the Applicant surfaced only in the memorandum statement of co-accused Satish Sinha, who has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 23.04.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No.3083/2025, while co-accused Rukunuddin @ Rukku and Devanti Verma have also been granted regular bail vide orders dated 02.05.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No.3418/2025 and 27.05.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No.4089/2025 respectively, therefore, the present Applicant is also entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail 5 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 Applicant is not named in the FIR and the allegation against him is confined to having introduced the parties and accompanied some of the co- accused persons and further considering that co-accused Vikram Singh Patel and Anurag Shrivastava have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 19.03.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.A. No.384/2025 and 02.05.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.A. No.634/2025 respectively, while co-accused Satish Sinha, Rukunuddin @ Rukku and Devanti Verma have been granted regular bail vide orders dated 23.04.2025, 02.05.2025 and 27.05.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. Nos.3083/2025, 3418/2025 and 4089/2025 respectively, without further commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity. 6. 6. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the Applicant – Janardan Netam 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:- 6 (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