ABHIGYA v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station

: Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate For State(s) For Objector : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, G.A. : Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

15.05.2026 Order on Board

1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 456/2026, registered at Police Station – Civil Line, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 211, 34, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 201 of the IPC.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the present applicant along with co-accused Kusumakar Rao Bhosle allegedly obtained various amounts from the complainant on the pretext of loan and 2 business requirements. It is alleged that initially the complainant advanced a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- to the accused persons on

15.07.2017, pursuant to which an agreement was executed on

18.07.2017. Thereafter, owing to cordial relations between the parties, the accused persons allegedly sought an additional cash loan of Rs.1 crore on 24.01.2018 and, upon the complainant’s request for execution of a fresh agreement, made corrections in the earlier agreement acknowledging the amount as loan liability. It is further alleged that during the years 2021 to 2022, the applicant and co-accused demanded and obtained further amounts from the complainant, aggregating to Rs.3,15,00,000/-, and subsequently executed another agreement at Raipur on

03.07.2024. The accused persons also allegedly issued cheques towards repayment of the loan amount, which came to be dishonoured on account of insufficient funds. Thereafter, the complainant submitted a written complaint before the Superintendent of Police and the concerned police station, however, the matter was treated as a civil dispute arising out of monetary transactions. Subsequently, the complainant filed an application under Section 175(3) of the B.N.S.S. before the learned JMFC, Bilaspur, seeking registration of FIR against the applicant and other co-accused persons. The learned Court below, vide order dated 01.04.2026, allowed the said application and directed the concerned police station to register and investigate the matter, pursuant to which FIR was registered 3 against the applicant and co-accused persons. Hence this bail application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the entire dispute arises out of monetary transactions between the parties and is purely civil in nature, which is evident from the fact that the complainant had initially approached the police authorities and the matter was closed by the concerned police station observing it to be a civil dispute. It is further submitted that the FIR came to be registered only pursuant to an order passed by the learned JMFC under Section 175(3) of the B.N.S.S. Learned counsel submits that the allegations pertain to loan transactions and execution of agreements between the parties and no ingredients constituting the offences alleged against the applicant are made out from the material available on record. It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 08.04.2026 and has cooperated with the investigation, there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail.

4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel as well as counsel appearing for the objector opposes the bail application filed by the applicant.

6. 4 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, particularly taking into account that the dispute appears to arise out of monetary transactions between the parties, the FIR was registered pursuant to an order passed under Section 175(3) of the B.N.S.S., and the applicant is languishing in jail since

08.04.2026, there is no likelihood of the present applicant for absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.

7. Let applicant, Dipendra Padhi, involved in Crime No.456/2026, registered at Police Station – Civil Line, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 211, 34, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 120 of IPC, 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 bail and pass orders in accordance with law. 5 (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. Saxena Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice