-1- CGHC010341732026 2026:CGHC:39608 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1478 of 2026 Rameshchandra Singh S/o Anant Prasad Singh Aged About 56 Years R/o Housw No. L. I. G.- 7, Vaishali, Nagar Near Satyam Bakery, Vaishali, Nagar Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattigarh. ... Applicant (s) versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O. Police Station Utai, District Durg Chhattisgar. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Shikhar Bakhtiyar, Advocate For State : Mr. Ashish Shukla, Addl. Advocate General For Objector : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 09/09/2026 1. Applicant has filed this application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of anticipatory bail as he is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.411 of 2026 registered at Police Station- Utai, District- Durg (CG) for offence punishable under Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2026.09.15 15:30:16 +0530 -2- Sections 318 (2), 318 (3), 318 (4), 336 (3), 338, 340 of BNS, 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that an application under Section 175 of the BNSS was filed by complainant B.B. Singh, Partner of A.B.B.S. Stone Crusher, before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patan, District Durg alleging therein that an Agreement to Sell in respect of certain land situated at Village Chhata, Tehsil Patan, District Durg, together with heavy mining machinery and an operational stone crusher plant, was executed in his favour by the co-accused Smt. Rita Singh through her husband Ramesh Chandra Singh (present applicant) and that substantial consideration was paid thereunder. It is alleged that notwithstanding receipt of the consideration, registered sale deed was not executed in respect of all the agreed parcels of land, that certain parcel of land stood recorded in the names of third person or comprised government leasehold land and that certain documents were prepared and signatures used without his consent. Upon the said application, Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 31.07.2026, directed registration of a criminal case. Pursuant thereto, Police Station Utai, District Durg (C.G.) registered FIR bearing Crime No.411/2026 against the applicant and other co-accused persons for the aforesaid offence. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in crime. -3- The entire prosecution case arises out of a single commercial transaction dated 29.02.2024 for purchase of a property, which was executed between the co-accused Smt. Rita Singh (wife of present applicant) and the complainant for a total sale consideration of Rs.4.50 crores but the present applicant is nowhere party to the said agreement. The complainant has already instituted civil suit. It is further submitted that the entire property is in possession of the complainant. Dispute, if any, is of civil nature and only to exert pressure, an attempt is being made to give it colour of criminal act. He further submits that under the same crime number, co-accused person Manav Chandra Singh (son of present applicant) has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 03.09.2026 passed in MCRCA No.1447 of 2026. Case of the applicant is similar to that of co-accused – Manav Chandra Singh. Therefore, the applicant may also be protected by granting him benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant and submit that, on the complaint of the complainant, jurisdictional Magistrate directed the concerned police station to register a case against the applicant and other co-accused persons. Pursuant thereto, a case was registered against the applicant and the other co- accused persons, and the investigation is presently in progress. It is further submitted that one of the allegations against the -4- present applicant is that he forged and affixed the signature of his wife, Smt. Rita Singh (co-accused), on the agreement in question. In view of the nature and gravity of the allegations and the fact that the investigation is still underway, the applicant is not entitled to the protection of anticipatory bail. 5. Learned counsel for the objector vehemently opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that, pursuant to the agreement entered into between the parties, the complainant paid a substantial amount towards the agreed consideration for the purchase of the land, machinery and crusher plant. Subsequently, discrepancies with regard to the ownership and transferability of the aforesaid properties came to light. Despite having received a substantial amount towards the agreed consideration, applicant and the other co-accused persons neither completed the transaction nor refunded the amount so received from the complainant. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the applicant is not entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the present applicant and further considering that the complainant is still in possession of the entire sale property, co-accused person has already been -5- enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 03.09.2026 passed in MCRCA No.1447 of 2026, without commenting anything on merit of the case, I am an inclined to allow this application. 8. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail by the Officer arresting him on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting officer. Applicant shall also abide by the following conditions :- “(i) that the applicant shall remain available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) 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 facts to the Court or to any police officer; Certified copy as per rules. Sd/----/-/---/-/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen