1 CGHC010336392026 2026:CGHC:38821 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8067 of 2026 1 - Bablu S/o Late Badan Khan Aged About 57 Years R/o Village Karra, Ratanpur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) Permanent R/o Gora Bazar, District- Jabalpur, (M.P.) 2 - Amur Khan S/o Natthu Khan Aged About 66 Years R/o Village Karra, Ratanpur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) Permanent R/o Gora Bazar, District- Jabalpur, (M.P.) 3 - Ameen Khan S/o Hakeem Khan Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Karra, Ratanpur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) Permanent R/o Gora Bazar, District- Jabalpur, (M.P.) 4 - Habeem Khan S/o Darbar Khan Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Karra, Ratanpur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) Permanent R/o Gora Bazar, District- Jabalpur, (M.P.) 5 - Shahrukh Khan S/o Naseem Khan Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Karra, Ratanpur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) Permanent R/o Gora Bazar, District- Jabalpur, (M.P.) 6 - Mohammad Achchan S/o Mohammad Eliyas Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Karra, Ratanpur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) Permanent R/o Rajpur, Rajakpur, District- Amroha (U.P.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Kota, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.09.03 11:03:30 +0530 2 For Applicant(s) : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02.09.2026 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.524/2026, registered at Police Station- Kota, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 112, 308 and 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Ramnarayan Singh Porte, lodged a report alleging that on 22.06.2026, the applicants approached him after coming to know that he was searching for a JCB for levelling his agricultural land situated at Village Navagaon, Charapara. The applicants allegedly assured the complainant that they would get the levelling work done through a JCB and, on such assurance, received an advance amount of Rs.2,00,000/- in cash, while the remaining amount of Rs.7,00,000/- was brought by the complainant’s son from Punjab National Bank, Kota Branch. It is alleged that, instead of carrying out the agreed work, the applicants dishonestly obtained a total sum of Rs.9,00,000/- from the complainant and thereafter fled away. On the basis of the said allegations, the 3 complainant lodged a report at Police Station Kota on 27.06.2026, pursuant to which the applicants were arrested on 02.07.2026 and an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- was allegedly seized from them. After completion of the investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet against the applicants for the alleged offence. It is further stated that the complainant has received the aforesaid amount pursuant to the order dated 23.07.2026 passed by the learned JMFC, Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.). 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the applicants had commenced the levelling work through a JCB on approximately three acres of the complainant’s agricultural land, however, a dispute subsequently arose regarding payment, as the complainant allegedly sought completion of the entire work for a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- and was unwilling to pay any further amount for the work undertaken. It is further contended that the complainant himself prevented the applicants from continuing and completing the work and thereafter lodged a false and frivolous complaint against them, despite an agreement having been executed between the parties. It is also submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise and executed an agreement dated 17.07.2026, pursuant to which the complainant applied for release of the seized amount and ultimately received Rs.9,00,000/- on supurdnama vide order dated 23.07.2026 passed by the learned JMFC, Kota, District Bilaspur. 4 So far as criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, the applicant has three criminal antecedents out of which, he has already been granted bail by this Court in two of the cases as explained in para 4(A) of the bail application. It is further submitted that applicant are languishing in jail since 02.07.2026 and though the charge-sheet has already been filed, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time hence, they deserve to be enlarged on bail. 4. The learned State counsel, opposing the bail application, would submit that there is sufficient material available against the applicants to establish their involvement in the alleged offence and that the applicants, on the pretext of getting the complainant’s agricultural land levelled through a JCB, dishonestly obtained a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- from him and failed to perform the promised work. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed after completion of the investigation and, therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the allegations and the material collected during investigation, the applicants are not entitled to be enlarged on bail merely on the ground that the amount has subsequently been released to the complainant on supurdnama. Hence, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations levelled against the applicants, the fact that the 5 dispute appears to have arisen in connection with the agreement for levelling of the complainant’s agricultural land through a JCB, the submission regarding the compromise entered into between the parties, and particularly considering that the amount of Rs.9,00,000/-, allegedly involved in the offence, has been released in favour of the complainant on supurdnama pursuant to the order dated 23.07.2026 passed by the learned JMFC, Kota, District Bilaspur, coupled with the fact that the applicants are in custody since 02.07.2026 and the charge-sheet has already been filed, thereby dispensing with the requirement of their further custodial interrogation, and further considering that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present bail application is allowed. 7. Let applicants, Bablu, Amur Khan, Ameen Khan, Habeem Khan, Shahrukh Khan and Mohammad Achchan, involved in Crime No.524/2026, registered at Police Station- Kota, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 112, 308 and 3(5) of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond (each) with two local sureties (each) in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned:- (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 6 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 them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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 7 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Manpreet