1 CGHC010342312026 2026:CGHC:39070 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8204 of 2026 1. Girdhari Prasad Agrawal @ G.P. Agrawal @ Giriraj Agrawal S/o Late Madanlal Agrawal Aged About 75 Years R/o Y-6 Civil Township Rourkela Odisha 2. Ramchander Shaw S/o Late Bhagwat Prasad Shaw Aged About 51 Years R/o L L L-6 Civil Township Rourkela, Odisha ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O.) Police Station Kotwali, Ambikapur District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 03.09.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 493/2026 registered at Police Station : Kotwali, Ambikapur, District - Surguja, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (for short ‘BNS’) RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant is the proprietor of Jai Hanuman Coal Depot, whereas the applicants are the proprietors of Maa Shakumbari Sponge Pvt. Ltd. According to the complainant, during the period from 15.07.2023 to 04.08.2023, he supplied coal through 26 trucks to the applicants’ proprietorship/private limited company; however, the complainant did not receive the consideration amount from the applicants. Thereafter, the complainant requested the applicants to make the payment, but the payment was delayed on the part of the applicants. Subsequently, on 25.06.2026 and 01.07.2026, the complainant informed the applicants through WhatsApp messages regarding the outstanding payment, however, the applicants failed to make the payment. Consequently, the complainant lodged a report alleging cheating against the applicants on 18.07.2026, on the basis of which the police registered the case and arrested the applicants. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that there was no intention to cheat the complainant and that the dispute arose solely on account of the quality of the coal supplied, pursuant to which a lesser amount was initially paid. As reflected from the ledger of the applicants’ company, an amount of Rs. 40,00,000/- was paid to Jai Hanuman Coal Depot between 19.07.2023 and 21.11.2023. The complainant neither issued any notice nor raised any demand regarding the alleged outstanding amount and, instead, directly lodged the report. Subsequently, the 3 dispute was settled, the entire outstanding amount was paid, and the complainant executed an affidavit acknowledging receipt of the complete payment and expressing his unwillingness to pursue the case. In this regard, an amount of Rs. 17,60,493/- was paid through the bank account of Maa Shakumbari Sponge Private Limited on 19.08.2026 towards the cost of coal and transportation charges. Thus, no amount remains outstanding. He further submits that the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, are not made out, as there was no entrustment of any property belonging to the complainant. At the highest, the matter involves a dispute regarding the quality of the coal supplied, which, particularly after substantial payment having already been made and the entire dispute having subsequently been settled, cannot constitute the alleged criminal offences. Out of the total consideration of approximately Rs. 42,00,000/-, an amount of Rs. 40,00,000/- had already been paid by the applicants in installments between 19.07.2023 and 21.11.2023. He submits that the applicants are respectable and established businessmen, carrying on the business of manufacturing iron sponge through their private limited company. He also submits that applicant No. 1 is 75 years of age, suffering from multiple health ailments and undergoing treatment, while applicant No. 2 is an income-tax assessee. The applicants have no criminal antecedents and have been in custody since 19.08.2026. Since the trial is likely to take some time, further detention of the applicants is neither necessary nor justified. Hence, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has not yet been filed in the present case before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the dispute appears to have arisen out of a transaction relating to the quality and payment for the coal supplied. A substantial amount of Rs. 40,00,000/- had already been paid, and the remaining amount has subsequently been paid, pursuant to which the complainant has acknowledged receipt of the entire payment and expressed his unwillingness to pursue the matter. The applicants have no criminal antecedents and have been in custody since 19.08.2026. Though the charge-sheet has not yet been filed, considering the advanced age of the applicants, the nature of the dispute, the subsequent settlement between the parties, and the likelihood of the trial taking considerable time, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants is allowed. 8. Let the Applicants - Girdhari Prasad Agrawal @ G.P. Agrawal @ Giriraj Agrawal and Ramchander Shaw, involved in Crime No. 493/2026 registered at Police Station : Kotwali, Ambikapur, District - Surguja, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on 5 bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- and one surety (which should be family member), subject to the following conditions :- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 their counsel. In case of their 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 their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, 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 6 opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants are 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. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Rahul Dewangan