1 2026:CGHC:8112 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1598 of 2026 Pritam Tekriwal S/o Shri Narayana Prasad Tekriwal Aged About 39 Years R/o Flat No. 601, 6th Floor, Block- A, Jainam Planet, Dumartalab, Raipur C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Saraswati Nagar, District Raipur C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Amrito Das, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Baghel, G.A. For Objector(s) : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Apurv Goyal, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13/02/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 20/2026 registered at Police Station Saraswati Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 61(2) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the accused persons induced the complainant company to invest approximately Rs.11.51 crores in a proposed immovable property transaction by representing that the property was free from encumbrances and legally transferable. Pursuant to meetings and execution of an Agreement to Sell dated 16.12.2025, the complainant made payments through banking channels. It is alleged that the property was already mortgaged with financial institutions and was subject to recovery proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, which was deliberately concealed from the complainant. On this basis, the prosecution alleges that the accused acted with dishonest intention from the very inception of the transaction, thereby causing wrongful loss to the complainant and wrongful gain to themselves. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that identically situated co- accused, namely, Vinod Bajoria has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 03.02.2026 in MCRCA No.167/2026. He also submits that the matter has 3 already been amicably compromised between the parties. Copies of the compromise deed have been filed along with a covering memo. The applicant is in jail since 16.01.2026, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant allegedly in connection with a proposed property transaction, misrepresented that the subject property was free from encumbrances and legally transferable, induced the complainant company to part with approximately Rs.11.51 crores under an Agreement to Sell, and concealed the fact that the property was already mortgaged and subject to recovery proceedings, thereby causing wrongful loss to the complainant. Hence, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. Learned counsel for the objector admitted the said fact that the matter has already been amicably compromised between the parties. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant 4 since 16.01.2026, the fact that though the applicant allegedly misrepresented that the property was free from encumbrances and induced the complainant to pay Rs.11.51 crores, despite the property being mortgaged and under recovery proceedings, but considering the fact that the matter has already been amicably compromised between the parties, the said fact is admitted by the learned counsel for the objector, further considering the fact that one co-accused, namely, Vinod Bajoria has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 03.02.2026 in MCRCA No.167/2026 and the applicant has no criminal antecedent, the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 9. Let the Applicant-Pritam Tekriwal, involved in Crime No. 20/2026 registered at Police Station Saraswati Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 61(2) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum 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 5 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. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil