1 2026:CGHC:17909 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 565 of 2026 Ruchi Kaushal D/o Shri Bhikham Kaushal, Aged About 23 Years R/o Budhwari Para, Ward No. 14, Dongargarh, Thana And Tahsil- Dongargarh, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Of Police Station-Supela, Distt. Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Rajendra Patel, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Soumya Rai, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20/04/2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending her arrest in connection with GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2026.04.21 19:09:54 +0530 2 Crime No.1401/2025 registered at Police Station –Supela, Distt. Durg (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 61(2), 111(4) of the BNS, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant namely Hirendra Nagdev submitted written complaint before the Police Station- Supela District Durg (C.G.) on the allegation that, under the guise of promising at least 4% monthly interest on deposits in forex and currency trading, and double and one and a half times the return on deposits in lucky draws, the accused Mahesh Kumar Sahu, Rahul Sharma, and Ruchi Kaushal defrauded him of 13 lakh, Girdhari Dewangan of 27 lakh, Shivshankar Patel of Rs.6 lakh, and several lakhs of rupees from other investors resulting in financial and mental harm. Based on the aforesaid compliant, an F.I.R was registered bearing no. 1401/2025 against accused persons Mahesh Kumar Sahu and other accused Rahul Sharma and Ruchi Kaushal under sections 318(2), 318(4), and 61(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023. Section 111(4) of the BNS was also added in the case committing economic crime in an organized manner and after completion of the entire investigation, the charge-sheet was filed against the co-accused Mahesh Sahu before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is argued that no amount was ever received, handled, or entrusted to the applicant, and there is no material on record establishing her involvement in any 3 financial transaction. He would further submits that, as per the prosecution’s own case, the alleged amount was received by co- accused Mahesh Kumar Sahu, who has already been granted bail, while no specific allegation is attributed to the present applicant. The applicant was merely an employee acting under instructions, with no independent authority or knowledge of any alleged wrongdoing. It is also contended that there is an unexplained delay of about two years in lodging the FIR, which casts doubt on the prosecution story. He would submit that the applicant is a 23-year-old lady with a clean background, she is a permanent resident of address mentioned in the cause title and there is no likelihood of absconding, the applicant undertakes to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court, therefore, he submits that the present applicant is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the non - applicant/State, opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. He would submit that the applicant, in connivance with co- accused Mahesh Kumar Sahu and Rahul Sharma, induced the complainant and other investors to deposit substantial amounts of money by assuring them of high returns, including 4% monthly interest through forex and currency trading and lucrative gains through lucky draw schemes. He would further submit that the applicant is stated to have actively participated in persuading investors, thereby facilitating the collection of funds under false 4 promises, therefore she is not entitled for benefit of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel for the parties, materials available on record, though allegation against the applicant is that the applicant, in connivance with co-accused persons, induced the complainant and other investors to deposit substantial amounts of money by assuring them of high returns, including 4% monthly interest through forex and currency trading and lucrative gains through lucky draw schemes and she is stated to have actively participated in persuading investors, thereby facilitating the collection of funds under false promises but considering the fact that the applicant is a lady and also considering the fact that investigation and trial are likely to take some time, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Ruchi Kaushal, on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, she shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 5 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) The applicant shall not involve herself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice gouri