1 CGHC010301792026 2026:CGHC:39671 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7162 of 2026  Praveen Kumar Kunjam @ Pittu S/o Jaganand Kunjam Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Purani Basti, Narahpur Tahsil And P.S. Narahpur District- Kanker Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kondagaon District- Kondagaon (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Kulesh Kumar Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Himanshu Yadu, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 10.09.2026 1) The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 440/2024 registered at Police Station Kondagaon, District Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offence under Section 420 r/w 34 of IPC. 2) Case of the prosecution, in brief is that an FIR was lodged on 12.12.2024 to the effect that the present applicant and co-accused 2 Ram Milan Mandavi coerced the complainant into giving Rs. 10,90,000/- in the name of providing employment on the post of Engineer in Bhilai Steel Plant. According to the FIR, a sum of Rs. 90,000/- was transferred into the bank A/c of the co-accused on 13.10.2023 and subsequently, sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- was transferred in to the same A/c. Thereafter, complainant approached the applicant and requested refund and when no heed was paid, FIR was lodged. 3) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the amount so grabbed was transferred in the bank A/c of the co-accused and present applicant was merely a mediator and he never received a penny in his bank A/c. He further submits that charge-sheet has been filed, there are no previous criminal antecedents against the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 11.07.2026 whereas conclusion of trial is likely to take time, therefore, instant bail application may kindly be allowed. 4) On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that complainant, namely, Maharam Komra as well as his daughter, namely, Bhupeshwari have categorically stated that the applicant extorted Rs. 10,90,000/- from them in the name of providing employment and the afore-stated amount has been transferred into the bank A/c of the co-accused, thus there is direct evidence against the applicant. He further submits that this bail application deserves to be rejected. 3 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6) A careful perusal of case diary would reveal that the complainant and his daughter have leveled serious allegations against the present applicant and it appears that sum of Rs. 10,90,000/- was transferred into the bank A/c of co-accused at the behest of the applicant. In view of the aforesaid, in my opinion, present applicant was involved in said illegal transaction. 7) Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, in the opinion of this Court, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is rejected. However, concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.09.11 11:01:47 +0530