S. Sarkanda, Tahsil And District Bilaspur C.G v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Purani Basti Raipur, District Raipur C.G
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:46373 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5810 of 2025 VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.09.11 12:55:21 +0530 Dr. Kishanu Das S/o Shri Viplav Kumar Das @ B.K. Das Aged About 33 Years Owner House No. 02, Royal Town Colony, Sipat Road, Ward No. 47, P.S. Sarkanda, Tahsil And District Bilaspur C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Purani Basti Raipur, District Raipur C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.09.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 175/2025 registered at Police Station - Purani Basti District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, Subrato Mukherjee house 2 number 62 Main Road Professor Colony Police Station Purani Basti District Raipur has made a written complaint and got the First Information Report written to the effect that the complainant's daughter Kumari Ayushi Mukherjee passed the NEET examination in the year 2023 with 412 marks, her score was not sufficient to get admission in a government college, the fee of non-government colleges of Chhattisgarh was Rs 65,00,000 lakh which was not suitable for the complainant's financial arrangement. Accused Dr. Kishanu Das contacted the complainant over the phone and told him that the fee in some colleges of West Bengal was 60 to 65 lakhs. The complainant said that this amount was beyond his means. Kishanu Das promised to arrange complete arrangements (including tuition and hostel) for Rs. 48,00,000 in J.M.N. College of Nadia district of West Bengal. On the behest of the accused, the complainant transferred Rs. 4,50,000 to his Indusind Bank account number 159179182752 and Rs. 50,000 to Kishanu Das's Canara Bank account number 0191101019432-and another account in the same bank to pay the college as per the procedure. Before admission, the accused told the complainant that the college management will tell the tuition fee as Rs. 86,00,000 and hostel fee as Rs. 48,00,000, so he should sign on it and I will make him pay Rs. 48,00,000 after admission. The complainant paid a total of Rs. 36,00,000 from November 2023 to November 2024 and the remaining Rs 12,00,000 remains to be paid in three and a half years. But the accused could not get the due amount of Rs 48,00,000 from the college and kept assuring that he would reduce the college fees. The college management is demanding Rs 86,00,000 from the complainant. The 3 non-applicant Kishanu Das has cheated the complainant by deceiving him and assuring him of getting admission in the college at a lower fee. On the report of the complainant, a crime was registered and investigation was taken up. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. The applicant is a medical student in West Bengal pursuing her graduation and has been falsely implicated due to a dispute between the college management and the complainant regarding the fee schedule, in which she had no role. The applicant only facilitated the payment of admission fees on behalf of the complainant, which does not constitute any offence. She was earlier arrested under political pressure on 03.03.2025 and was forced by the police to execute an agreement in favour of the complainant. Thereafter, she lodged a written complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Raipur on 03.04.2025, but no action was taken. The agreement and complaint are part of the case diary and charge sheet. The applicant has been in jail since 05.05.2025, is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, with no likelihood of absconding or tampering with prosecution witnesses, and is ready to furnish adequate surety and abide by any conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court. therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 4. 5. 6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel 4 for the parties, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has no previous antecedents and the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed and he has been in jail since 05.05.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Let the Applicant – Dr. Kishanu Das, involved in Crime No. 175/2025 registered at Police Station - Purani Basti District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 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 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. (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, 5 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. - vaibhav Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice