1 2026:CGHC:12478 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2427 of 2026 Devendra Sen S/o Prahlad Sen Aged About 26 Years R/o Near Behind Lodhipara Crystal Arcade, Khaparabhatthi, Besides Rinku Kirana Shop, P.S. Mowa, Pandri, Raipur, Tahsil And Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The P.S. Civil Lines, Raipur, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. N. Naha Roy, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh K. Pande, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 16.03.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 152/2025, registered at Police Station : Civil Lines, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the o9ence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 470, 471, 201, 120-B, 34 of IPC, 1860. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that during the course of investigation it was found that the amount deposited by the complainant and other victims was credited in the bank account of KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 co-accused Balbir Singh. During interrogation, the said co-accused disclosed that the present applicant Devendra Sen was involved in preparing forged LIC deposit receipts. It is alleged that the present applicant used to prepare fake deposit receipts in the name of policy holders and for this purpose co-accused Balbir Singh used to charge Rs. 5,000/-. It is further alleged that after generating the receipts in the computer system, the same were deleted from the system in order to conceal the o9ence. Based upon such, aforesaid o9ences were registered against the applicant along with co- accused. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the prosecution has concocted a false case against the applicant which is not supported by any cogent evidence. It is further submitted that the applicant is neither named in the FIR nor any allegation has been made against him therein and his alleged involvement as re;ected in the charge-sheet is baseless. He further submits that the applicant has been working at Sagar Choice Center since the year 2021 and prior thereto he was working at an LIC premium center run by his maternal uncle Vijay Kumar Singh, from where he was ousted due to denial of his salary, therefore the allegation that the receipts were issued from the o>ce of his maternal uncle has no substance. It is also submitted that no recovery of any receipt has been made from the applicant and no relevant data has been found in his mobile phone. He further submits that the memorandum statement of co-accused Balbeer 3 Singh Sains refers to payment of Rs.5,000/- to one Devendra Nishad, who is a di9erent person and not the present applicant. It is lastly submitted that one of the co-accused persons, namely Smt. Saranjeet Kaur, has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in MCRC (A) No. 646/2025 vide order dated 05.05.2025 and the applicant has been in custody for more than three months and the investigation has already been completed, therefore he prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that considering the nature and gravity of the allegations against the present applicant and his involvement in preparation of forged LIC receipts, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. Therefore, he prays for rejection of the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of o9ence, period of detention of the applicant since 25.11.2025 and the fact that in the present case, charge- sheet has been ?led before the competent Court and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and the name of the applicant does not appear in the FIR, no further interrogation is required and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let applicant, Devendra Sen, involved in Crime No. 152/2025, 4 registered at Police Station : Civil Lines, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the o9ence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 470, 471, 201, 120-B, 34 of IPC, 1860, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall ?le an undertaking to the e9ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates ?xed 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 ?xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su>cient 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 ?xed 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 ?xed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under 5 Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without su>cient 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. 9. O>ce is directed to send a certi?ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal