Gautam Banjare Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:42758

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 4350 of 2025

¶6

Gautam Banjare S/o Babulal Banjare Aged About 41 Years Resident Of Ward No. 1 Nagar Panchayat Abhanpur, Police Station Abhanpur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶7

--- Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Bagbahara, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh

¶10

--- Respondent

¶11

MCRC No. 5949 of 2025

¶12

Mohanlal Range S/o Shri Johatru Range Aged About 55 Years R/o Village - Ghorbhatti, Thana And Tahsil Aarang, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶13

---Applicant

¶14

Versus

¶15

State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Ps Reserve Center Bagbahara, District - Mahasamund Chhattisgarh

¶16

--- Respondent

¶17

MCRC No. 5459 of 2025

¶18

Rajesh Dheevar S/o Late Sukul Dheevar, Aged About 36 Years R/o. Ward No. 12, Tumgao, P.S. Tumgao, Tahsil And District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh)

¶19

---Applicant

¶20

Versus

¶21

State Of Chhattisgarh Through PS- Bagbahra, District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh)

¶22

--- Respondent

¶23

2

¶24

MCRC No. 5470 of 2025

¶25

Manharan Chandrakar S/o Late Dinanath Chandrakar, Aged About 50 Years R/o Village - Dawanbod, Tehsil And Police Station - Baghbahara, District - Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh).

¶26

--- Applicant

¶27

Versus

¶28

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Officer-In-Charge Of Police Station - Baghbahara, District - Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh).

¶29

--- Respondent

¶30

(Cause title is taken from Case Information System)

¶31

For Applicant : Mr. Leekesh Kumar, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar in M.Cr.C. No. 4350 of 2025 For Applicant : Ms. Anamika Jain, Adv. in M.Cr.C. No. 5459 of 2025 For Applicant : Mr. R.K. Verma, Adv. in M.Cr.C. No. 5470 of 2025. For Applicant : Mr. J.K. Gupta, Adv. in M.Cr.C. No. 5949 of 2025. For Non-applicant : Mr. Santosh Soni, Govt. Advocate for State.

¶32

(Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

¶33

Order on Board

¶34

22/08/2025

¶35

1. Since all the bail applications arise out of a common crime number and registered at same police station, therefore, they are being heard analogously and decided by this Common Order.

¶36

2. These are the first bail application filed by the applicants under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of bail as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 187 / 2023, registered at Police Station Bagbahra, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶37

3. Allegation against the present applicants are that they impersonated co-accused namely Jugar Bai to be the vendor Neman Bai and applicant

¶38

3

¶39

Rajesh Dheever to be co-owner Manoj Chandrakar and sold the impugned land jointly owned by Manaharan Chandrakar (one of the accused persons), Manoj Chandrakar (complainant) and their mother Neman Bai vide registered sale deed dated 28.9.2022 to one Pushpendra Ghritlahre and thereby all the accused persons cheated original land-owner of the impugned land. Based on above facts, present FIR was registered at the behest of one of the co-owner of the impugned land namely, Manoj Chandrakar and the applicants were arrested on 11.05.2025, 16.05.2024, 29.05.2025 & 12.05.2025, respectively.

¶40

4. Learned counsel appearing for applicant in M.Cr.C.No. 4350 /2025 would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 11.05.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. It is submitted that though two criminal antecedents have been reported against applicant – Gautam Banjare, but from one case bearing Criminal Case No. 20 / 2016, he has been acquitted by Upper Sessions Judge, Dhamatari, vide judgment dated 20.09.2016, of the offence under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC whereas second antecedent is Crime No. 353 / 2017 registered at Police Station Kurud for the offence under Section 279 & 337 of the IPC for rash driving only, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail.

¶41

5. Learned counsel appearing for their respective applicants in remaining bail applications would jointly submit that applicants are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He submits that after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed by the police on 8.8.2025 and the applicants are in detention since 16.05.2024, 29.05.2025 & 12.05.2025, respectively. It is submitted that no criminal antecedents have

¶42

4

¶43

been reported against their respective applicants and conclusion of the trial is likely to take long time, hence, they may be enlarged on bail.

¶44

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that alleged act is a clear act of fraud by impersonating the original landowner and thus defrauding around Rs 34 lakh and, therefore, looking to the grievousness of the crime, the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail.

¶45

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary of the case with utmost circumspection.

¶46

8. Except applicant Gautam Banjare, there is no criminal antecedents reported against other accused persons Even out of the two criminal antecedents reported against applicant Gautam Banjare, he has been acquitted in one case and another case is only of rash driving. Further, the applicants are in jail since 11.05.2025, 16.05.2024, 29.05.2025 & 12.05.2025, respectively; charge-sheet has already been filed; conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time and all the applicants are permanent resident of District Raipur & Mahasamund, therefore, there is no chance of their absconding, hence, I feel inclined the applicants on regular bail.

¶47

9. Accused/applicants are directed to be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50 ,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. They shall be released on bail on the following conditions.

¶48

(i) They 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 fact to the Court, (ii) They shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and

¶49

5

¶50

(iii) They shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

¶51

(iv) They shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future.

¶52

Sd/-

¶53

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

¶54

AMITKUMAR Digitally signedby AMITKUMAR DUBEYDate: amit DUBEY 2025.08.2513:17:13 +0530

Gautam Banjare v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gautam Banjare v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sagir Siddiqui Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Narayan Kumar Sahu Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Sharda Charan Vs Chief Engineer

Gopal Krishna Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Neelmani Dewangan Vs Chhattisgarh State Co. Operative Marketing Federation

Dr. Govind Prasad Tiwari, Vs State of Chhattisgarh