1 CGHC010286702026 2026:CGHC:38419 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6972 of 2026 1 - Liladhar Shivaji Waghmare S/o Shivaji Waghmare, Aged About 34 Years Resident Of Village Mhasepathar, Shankarpat, Post Mohpa, District Nagpur, Maharashtra 2 - Bhola Pisaram Gavate, S/o Pisaram Gavate, Aged About 40 Years Resident Of Village Nandikheda, Police Station Mohpa, District Nagpur, Maharashtra 3 - Mukesh Pisaram Soneshwar, S/o Pisaram Soneshwar, Aged About 31 Years Resident Of Village Parsodi Vakil, Post Pipla, Police Station Mohpa, District Nagpur, Maharashtra 4 - Parmeshwar Pisaram Eknath, S/o Pisaram Eknath, Aged About 37 Years Resident Of Village Selu, Post Kalmabi, Tehsil Kaalmeshwar, Police Station Kaalmeshwar, District Nagpur, Maharashtra 5 - Dinesh Ishwar Soneshwar, S/o Ishwar Soneshwar, Aged About 31 Years Resident Of Village Deshmukh, Post Pardi, Police Station Mohpa, District Nagpur, Maharashtra ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Bande, District Uttar Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh ...Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.09.01 11:07:29 +0530 2 31.08.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 51/2026 registered at Police Station – Bande, District Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 308(5), 318(4), 354, 61(2) of the BNS. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 25.06.2026, the complainant, namely Balram Sarkar, resident of P.V. 104 Deepganar, lodged a written report at Police Station Bande alleging that on 17.05.2026 at about 12:00 noon, an unknown person dressed as a Sadhu, accompanied by a five-legged Nandi bull, came to his house and, after seeking donations and performing rituals, told him that gold was buried in his house and that unless the same was extracted, the illness of his family members would not be eradicated and he would not become wealthy. The said person provided his mobile number and instructed the complainant to purchase Swayam Sundari Bhasma worth Rs.52,000/-. Accordingly, the complainant went to Gadchiroli and, as instructed, purchased one gram of the said medicine from Maa Jamuna Ayurvedic Shop for Rs.52,000/-. Thereafter, on 02.06.2026, the said unknown person along with two other persons came to the complainant's house in a car and performed puja at midnight in the process of extracting the alleged gold and took out a small pot, which appeared to contain a gold biscuit, and sealed the same in a red cloth while threatening the complainant not to open it, stating that doing so would result in the death of a member of his 3 family. The accused persons thereafter instructed the complainant to procure Nav Jeevan Amrit Bhasma, initially 5 grams and subsequently 2 grams, which the complainant purchased from the same shop for Rs.4,44,000/-, and further purchased other medicines and puja material, allegedly spending a total amount of approximately Rs.4,96,000/- towards the medicines and Rs.4,000/- towards puja material. When the complainant was subsequently pressured to purchase another 3 grams of the said medicine and was unable to arrange the money, he opened the sealed pot and found 21 gold- coloured idols, which upon rubbing were found to be made of brass. Thus, alleging that he had been induced and cheated by the unknown persons by falsely representing that gold was buried in his house and by threatening him with dire consequences, the complainant lodged the written report, on the basis of which the FIR was registered against the owner/shopkeeper of Maa Jamuna Ayurvedic Shop and other unknown persons, and the matter is presently under investigation. The applicants thereafter moved an application for regular bail before the Court below, which came to be rejected, and hence the present first regular bail application has been preferred before this Hon’ble Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicants never compelled or insisted upon the complainant to purchase medicines or puja articles worth approximately Rs.5,00,000/- and that the complainant himself voluntarily agreed to perform the suggested puja for extraction of gold. Learned counsel submits that the complainant himself went to the 4 shop and purchased Swayam Sundari Bhasma and Nav Jeevan Amrit Bhasma from the shopkeeper of Maa Jamuna Ayurvedic Shop and paid the entire amount to the shopkeeper, whereas not a single penny was received by the applicants. It is further submitted that the applicants had merely suggested certain puja rituals for the well-being and healthier life of the complainant's family and had not obtained any money from him. Learned counsel further submits that the entire amount was paid by the complainant to the shopkeeper and, therefore, the applicants have no financial benefit from the alleged transaction. It is also submitted that applicant Nos.1 to 3 have no criminal antecedents and are first offenders, whereas applicant Nos.4 and 5 have the criminal cases referred to in the application pending against them, and except the same, no other criminal case is pending against the applicants. It is further submitted that the applicants have been in custody since 30.06.2026, the charge-sheet has not yet been filed and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Learned counsel further submits that the applicants are permanent residents of the addresses mentioned in the cause title, there is no likelihood of their absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, and they are ready to furnish adequate security and abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court. Hence, the applicants pray that they may kindly be released on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that the applicants No. 4 and 5 have one previous criminal antecedent. 5 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 nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the applicants, the period of detention, as the applicants have been in judicial custody since 30.06.2026, the fact that charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicants. 7. Let the Applicants – Liladhar Shivaji Waghmare, Bhola Pisaram Gavate, Mukesh Pisaram Soneshwar, Parmeshwar Pisaram Eknath & Dinesh Ishwar Soneshwar involved in Crime No. 51/2026 registered at Police Station – Bande, District Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 308(5), 318(4), 354, 61(2) of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants 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 open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicants 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 his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail 6 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 applicants 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 them 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 Vaibhav