MCRCA/1474/2026 of SHANKAR RAI Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 28 September 2026

1. Applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail as he apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 331/2026 registered at Police Station- City Kotwali, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(4), 318(4) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023.

2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that complainant lodged a report in the concerned police station alleging that applicant came to him and informed about the Intek Solution Company and stated that if the complainant invests the amount he would receive huge returns. Based on the information and assurance, sum of about Rs. 50 Lac has been deposited by him in the said company. For a period of about 03 months, complainant got the returns however thereafter the returns on the amount deposited by complainant was stopped, subsequently thereafter report was lodged.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the allegation levelled against applicant is false and baseless. Applicant is also one of the victim of the said scheme. According to the allegation levelled in the F.I.R. it is appearing that the applicant approached the complainant and informed about the company and no other act of him has been narrated for commission of offence as alleged. He submits that based on the report, police has conducted enquiry after which in the report there is mentioned that applicant has also deposited an amount of Rs. 13 Lac in the Intek Solution Company. There is no other criminal antecedent against applicant, hence, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission of counsel for applicant. However, he does not dispute the submission of learned counsel for applicant that applicant has only informed the complainant about the company and it is the complainant himself who has directly invested the amount in the company. He also submits that there is no criminal antecedent against applicant.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the documents enclosed along with bail application.

6. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for the parties, without commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to allow this anticipatory bail application.

7. Accordingly, application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant in connection with the crime in question (331/2026), he shall be released on anticipatory bail by the Officer arresting him on his executing a personal bond in the sum of ₹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 make himself available for interrogation before the Investigation Officer as and when required;

(ii) that 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) that the applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and

(iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.

Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn

JUDGE