MCRCA/1700/2026 of SMT. KAUSHILYA BAI MARKANDEY Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 12 October 2026

1. Applicant has filed this application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of anticipatory bail as she is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.210 of 2025 registered at Police Station- Hathband, District- Balodabaar- Bhatapara, (CG) for offence punishable under Sections 318 (4), 3 (5) and 112 of the

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that written complaint was lodged by complainant Dwarika Prasad Pal, alleging that on 16.08.2025 at about 4:00 P.M., accused persons, came to the complainant and offered to purchase his paddy crop @ Rs. 2200/- Per Quintal, assuring that the entire amount would be paid within 15 Days. After buying 158.47 quintals of paddy from the complainant, the accused persons paid only Rs. 60,000/- in two installments and later failed to pay the remaining amount of Rs 2,88,634/-. It has been further alleged that the accused persons also purchased the paddy from other farmers and did not make payment to them, thereby cheating them. On the basis of the aforesaid report, FIR has been registered against the co- accused persons. Applicant is also apprehending her arrest in connection with aforementioned crime number.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has not committed any offence as alleged. According to complaint, Daksh Tandon has purchased the paddy from villagers, however, he could not able to pay said amount. When pressure was made, one cheque is handed over by Toran Dhruv of his bank account in the name of Reshmi, Anjor and present applicant. He contended that according to his instruction, applicant is also not the signatory to the cheque. There is no other criminal antecedent of applicant. Hence, she may be extended benefit of anticipatory bail.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submission of learned counsel for the applicant. However, upon putting question with regard to signatory on the cheque, they fairly submit that as per record, cheque is signed by Reshmi. They also submit that allegation of purchase of paddy is against Daksh Tandon and handing over of cheque is against Toran Dhruv.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegation, there is no criminal antecedent of applicant, I am inclined to allow the present application.

7. Accordingly, application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail by the Officer arresting her on her executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting officer. Applicant shall also abide by the following conditions :- “(i) that the applicant shall remain available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.”

Certified copy as per rules. Sd/-/---/-/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen