1 CGHC010348302026 2026:CGHC:39933 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1497 of 2026 Devendra Kumar Singh S/o Gulab Singh Aged About 39 Years R/o Thakur Prasad Ka Purwa, Rampur Police Station Sichendi, District Kanpur Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer Police Station Deori District Balod C. G. ... Respondent For Applicant :Ms. Avit Lakra, Advocate. For Respondent-State :Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 11/09/2026 1. Applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail as he apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 44/2025 registered at Police Station – Deori District - Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 317(2), 317(4) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that one Khilesh Dewangan lodged a report at Police Station Deori, stating that Kamlesh Raote approached him and informed him to deposit some amount in his bank account, which would thereafter be returned to him. Accordingly, the co-accused Kamlesh Raote, using different accounts, deposited an amount of Rs.77,200/- in his account and VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.09.15 13:05:29 +0530 2 subsequently received the same. The complainant, therefore, prayed for taking appropriate action against Kamlesh Raote. Based on the said report, a crime was initially registered against Kamlesh Raote and other co-accused persons. The applicant was subsequently arrayed as an accused during the course of investigation on the basis of the memorandum statements of Kamlesh Raote and Pankaj Singh. Based on the said complaint, a crime was registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. He further submits that the applicant has no involvement in the alleged commission of the offence. He also submits that two other co-accused persons, including Kamlesh Raote, against whom the FIR was initially lodged, have been acquitted by the learned trial Court on 09.07.2026. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may also be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the applicant has remained absconding since the registration of the FIR. He further submits that the charge-sheet has been filed against two persons, showing the present applicant as absconding. However, it is not in dispute that the two other co- accused persons have been acquitted by the trial Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 6. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for the parties, 3 without commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to allow this anticipatory bail application. 7. Accordingly, application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant in connection with the crime in question (44/2025), 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 make himself available for interrogation before the Investigation Officer as and when required; (ii) that 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) that the applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- Sd (Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE vaibhav