1 CGHC010383712026 2026:CGHC:42594 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1610 of 2026 1 - Ajay Sahu S/o Dhaluram Sahu Aged About 35 Years R/o Annapurna Villa, Ward No. 09, New Shakti Nagar, Near Agrasen Iti, Village Dhanora, Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mohan Nagar, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Sumit Singh, Dy. Advocate General For Objector : Mr. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 30/09/2026 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. 657/2026 registered at Police Station- Mohan Nagar, District - Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant namely, Vijay Singh Chauhan lodged report in the concerned police station alleging that, he came into contact with the applicant/accused who was an LIC Development Officer, in Bhilai in the year 2024. It is alleged that the 2 applicant along with co-accused Lokesh Khullar, induced the complainant to invest money in purchase and sale of land by representing that he would earn substantial profit within a short period. Thereafter, the complainant along with co-accused Amit Sahu was taken to Urla, Durg, where a sale-deed relating to land bearing Khasra Nos. 809/1, admeasuring 0.1024 hectare, and 809/2, admeasuring 0.1022 hectare, was executed and agreement dated 07.10.2024 with the landowners, wherein the complainant and co-accused Lokesh Khullar were shown as purchasers. It is further alleged that, pursuant to the said transaction, the complainant paid an amount of ₹51,000/- through PhonePe and ₹5,00,000/- and 4,50,000/- through cheques in favour of the concerned ₹ co-accused persons. However, the sale transaction was not completed within the stipulated period up to 15.03.2025. Subsequently, upon issuing legal notice to the landowners, the complainant allegedly came to know that the accused persons had sold and registered in favour of another person. The advance amount paid by the complainant was also allegedly not returned to the complainant and the accused applicant along with other persons have committed cheating and fraud with the complaint. Based on the complaint, aforementioned FIR was registered against which, the applicant is apprehending his arrest. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that absolutely false allegations have been leveled against him. He has not committed any offence as alleged. He submits that the applicant is not involved in an any manner in commission of the crime as alleged. As per allegation, he ws only present at the time of execution of the agreement. He also contended that the allegation in the report is that the complainant has paid a sum of Rs. 9.80 Lakhs to Vimal Sahu and Suryakant Sahu. However, according to instructions Lokesh Khullar co-accused has 3 already returned a sum of Rs. 15 Lakhs without admitting the guilt to the complainant and Lokesh Khullar has been enlarged on regular bail by the learned Trial Court. Hence, this anticipatory bail application may also be allowed. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission of counsel for applicant and would submit that according to allegation, the co-accused Vimal Sahu and Suryakant Sahu have entered into an agreement for selling of the aforesaid land including the land which was already, sold to some other person. He also submits that according to the allegation on the instructions of Lokesh Khullar and the present applicant, the complainant has paid the advance amount. Upon asking, he submits that there is no other criminal antecedent against the applicant. 5. Learned counsel for the Objector would also oppose the submission of the counsel for the applicant. However, she submits that according to her instructions, a sum of only Rs. 10 Lakhs has been paid to the complainant not Rs. 15 Lakhs. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents enclosed along with the bail application. 7. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for the parties, the co- accused person Lokesh Khullar has already paid a sum of Rs. 10 Lakhs as stated by the counsel for the Complainant and the said co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by the learned Trial Court, there is no other criminal antecedent against the applicant, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this anticipatory bail application. 4 8. Accordingly, application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant in connection with the crime in question (130/2026), he shall be released on anticipatory bail by the Officer arresting him on his executing a personal bond in the sum of ₹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 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Dey Judge SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY