1 CGHC010332962026 2026:CGHC:38658 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No.1435 of 2026 Rajesh Seth S/o Late Kailash Seth, Aged About 55 Years R/o Vinayka Heights, Near Tarbahar Under Bridge, Police Station - Tarbahar, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Tarbahar, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Shri Aman Upadhyay, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Shri Saumya Rai,Dy.GA For Objector : Shri Hariom Rai, Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 01/09/2026 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS, 2023’) has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.230/2026 registered at Police Station – Tarbahar, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of IPC. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant-Chandrika Prasad Kushwaha entered into an agreement in the year 2016 with the present applicant Rajesh Seth and co-accused Rajni Seth (wife of SATISH TUMANE Digitally signed by SATISH TUMANE Date: 2026.09.01 18:56:11 +0530 2 present applicant) for purchase of Flat No. 402, Vinayaka Heights, for a consideration of Rs.30,00,000/-. The complainant obtained a housing loan through the concerned Cent Bank and the flat was registered in his favour on 18.02.2017. It is alleged that the flat was to be completed within one year, but the construction was not completed. The complainant further alleges that in the year 2019 he came to know about the proceedings of Bank of Baroda in respect of the property and thereafter certain remaining loan amounts were disbursed by the concerned bank officials to the builder. It is further alleged that there were irregularities in the documents and building plan of the property. When the complainant failed to repay the loan amount and the bank took the symbolic possession in the month of January, the complainant submitted a written report against the applicant as well as the officials of Cent Bank. On the basis of the said allegations, the present Crime No. 230/2026 has been registered on 11.07.2026 under Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the applicant and other accused persons i.e Rajani Seth applicant's wife- builder, Shashibhushan Karn Branch Manager Cent Bank, Aparna Biswas- allegedly involved in the search/verification and disbursement process, Nitin Nigam allegedly involved in verification of the property documents, Jolly B. Philips- allegedly approved the first and second disbursement of loan amount. In connection with the said crime, the applicant apprehend his arrest. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case on account of long- standing civil dispute of Flat No.402, Vinayaka Heights and there is no material against the applicant which demonstrating the applicant had 3 any dishonest or fraudulent person or any intention which constitutes the offence under Section 420 of IPC against the applicant. It is also submitted that there is unexplained delay of almost ten years in lodging the FIR as the transaction pertains to the year 2016-17 and the present FIR has been lodged on 11/07/2026. It is also submitted that the present dispute arises out of the loan, property and repayment transaction and is essentially of a civil nature which has been given a criminal colour by lodging the FIR. It is lastly submitted that the applicant has been earlier granted anticipatory bail in case relating to similar allegations, vide order dated 25/02/2022 passed in MCRCA No.59 of 2022. He would further submit that the applicant undertakes to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and, being permanent resident, there is no likelihood of absconding or tampering with evidence; hence, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the Objector, opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents taken on record. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case and the fact that there is no material against the applicant which constitutes the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC as also considering the fact that the present dispute involves civil nature and there is unexplained delay in lodging the FIR and the fact that the present applicant and another co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated 25/08/2026 passed in MCRCA No.1407 of 2026, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant has made out a case for grant 4 of anticipatory bail. 7. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Rajesh Seth, 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 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) The Applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicant 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 alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. SD/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Tumane