Krishna Yadav S/o Late Chandrika Yadav Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Belsand, P.S v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Balod, District Balod, Chhattisgarh
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:49225 NAFR GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.09.25 19:19:17 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5108 of 2025 Krishna Yadav S/o Late Chandrika Yadav Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Belsand, P.S. Barauli, District Gopalganj, Bihar. --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Balod, District Balod, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent MCRC No. 5178 of 2025 1 - Ankit Yadav S/o Anil Yadav Aged About 21 Years R/o Belsand, P.S. Madhopur, District Gopalganj, Bihar. 2 - Shivji Prasad Yadav S/o Madan Lal Aged About 38 Years R/o Jagannath, P.S. Majhagarh, District Gopalganj, Bihar ---Applicants Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Police Station Balod, District Balod, C.G. --- Respondent For Applicants
Legal Reasoning
: Shri Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, Advocate. For : Shri Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. Respondent/State 2 Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 25/09/2025 1. Both these second bail applications are decided by this common order as they are arising out of the same crime number. 2. These are the second bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.292/2024 registered at Police Station Balod, District Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420,411,413,120 B and 34 of IPC. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 26.05.2024, the complainant received a WhatsApp voice call from an individual claiming to be a police officer from Balod police station. The caller falsely informed the complainant that their son, Ajay Kumar Sarva, was implicated in a rape case and demanded a sum of Rs 2,00,000/- to secure his release. Acting under duress, the complainant transferred a total of Rs 1,90,000 in various installments to the bank account details provided by the caller. Subsequently, a case was registered under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, and an investigation was initiated. During the investigation, the Call Detail Record (CDR) and location tracking of the suspect's mobile number led to the identification and detention of the accused, Krishna Yadav, son of late Chandrika Yadav, aged 24 years, a resident of Belsand Police Station, Barauli District, Bhopalganj (Bihar). Upon interrogation, Krishna Yadav confessed to committing the fraud. His PAN card, Aadhaar card, and 3 other documents used in the commission of the crime were seized in the presence of witnesses. Additionally, based on the memorandum of the accused under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, the involvement of co-accused individuals came to light, leading to their subsequent arrest and further investigative actions against them. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that these are the second bail applications of the applicants and the first bail application of the applicants being MCRC No.4818/2025 was not rejected on merits, it was dismissed as withdrawn on 24/06/2025. He would submit that the applicants and the complainant have amicably settled their dispute and the alleged amount have been paid fully to the complainant and also the complainant has filed an affidavit of No-Objection for granting bail to the applicants before the trial court. He would submit that applicant Krishna Yadav is in jail since 07/02/2025 and applicants Ankit Yadav and Shivji Prasad Yadav are in jail since 02/05/2025 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application. He would submit that applicant Krishna Yadav and applicant Ankit Yadav do not have any criminal antecedents but applicant Shivji Prasad Yadav has one criminal antecedent in the State of UP. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. From perusal of the records, it transpires that these are the second bail applications of the applicants and the first bail application of the 4 applicants being MCRC No.4818/2025 was not rejected on merits, it was dismissed as withdrawn on 24/06/2025. Considering the fact that the applicants and the complainant have amicably settled their dispute and the alleged amount have been paid fully to the complainant and affidavit to this effect has also been filed vide Annexure A-3, further the fact that applicant Krishna Yadav is in jail since 07/02/2025 and applicants Ankit Yadav and Shivji Prasad Yadav are in jail since 02/05/2025 and also considering the fact that trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, both the second bail applications are allowed and it is directed that the applicant Krishna Yadav in MCRC No. 5108 of 2025 and applicants Ankit Yadav & Shivji Prasad Yadav in MCRC No. 5178 of 2025 involved in Crime No.292/2024 registered at Police Station Balod, District Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420,411,413,120 B and 34 of IPC, be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In 5 case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 them in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. gouri Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE