1 2026:CGHC:15852 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3083 of 2026 Mukesh Verma S/o Late Vinod Verma Aged About 52 Years R/o Sector 10, House No 4/b Street No. 33/a, Bhilai Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Cg Through District- Magistrate Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vikhyat Arora and Mr. Ankur Diwan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.04.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 420/2025 registered at Police Station : Pulgaon District - Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120b & 34 of the IPC. 2. According to the prosecution story, it is alleged that the accused VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.04.07 16:46:10 +0530 2 persons, namely Manoj Kumar Sahu, Rajat Verma, and Mukesh Verma, acted in collusion with each other and committed the offences of cheating and forgery by dishonestly inducing several persons and extracting money from them on the false promise of securing government jobs. It is specifically alleged that the accused persons fraudulently obtained an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- from the complainant on the pretext of securing a government job for the post of Food Inspector. On the basis of the said allegations, an FIR was registered against the accused persons in Crime No. 420/2025 at Pulgaon Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and subsequently, during the course of investigation, Section 120-B of the IPC was also added. Thereafter, the accused persons were arrested on 03.10.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that none of the essential ingredients of the offences alleged against the applicant are made out and the entire prosecution case is baseless and frivolous. The applicant is a law-abiding citizen and there is no possibility of his influencing the witnesses or tampering with the evidence. The charge-sheet has already been filed and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. If the applicant is not enlarged on bail, he shall suffer irreparable loss and injury. It is also submitted that no ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code are made out against the applicant. Further, one of the co-accused, namely Mahesh Heraou, has already been granted regular bail by this 3 Hon’ble Court in M.Cr.C. No. 1522/2026 vide order dated 17.03.2026. The applicant is in judicial custody since 03.10.2025, has no criminal antecedents, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time. It is also submitted that there is no money transaction reflected in the account of the applicant and no significant seizure has been made from his possession, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. 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 and gravity of the offence, and the fact that the co-accused, namely Mahesh Heraou, has already been granted bail vide order dated 17.03.2026 passed in MCRC No.1522 of 2026, and further considering that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 03.10.2025, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. 7. Let applicant, Mukesh Verma, involved in Crime No. 420/2025 registered at Police Station : Pulgaon District - Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120b & 34 of the IPC, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with 4 two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 applicant 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 him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. 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 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant 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 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav