Rajesh Sharma @ Rajesh Bhanot @ Bhagat Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:3010

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 672 of 2026

¶6

1 - Rajesh Sharma @ Rajesh Bhanot @ Bhagat S/o Late Satyanarayan Sharma @ Shambhu Narayan Sharma Aged About 61 Years R/o 192 B, Samta Colony, Raipur, District Raipur C.G.

¶7

... Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Saraswati Nagar, District Raipur C.G.

¶10

... Respondent(s)

¶11

For Applicant : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Himanshu Yadu, P.L.

¶12

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

19/01/2026

¶15

The applicant has preferred this Third bail application under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.82/2011, registered at Police Station – Saraswati Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of IPC.

¶16

2

¶17

The applicant had earlier preferred his first bail application, which was dismissed as withdrawn and subsequently filed a second bail application that was rejected by this Court.

¶18

As per the prosecution records, Dolphin International School was a registered society and was wholly managed and controlled by the accused persons. During the period between 04.02.2011 and 17.03.2011, the accused collected amounts ranging from Rs.50,000/to Rs.1,00,000/- from each parent in the name of the society, on the assurance that educational facilities would be provided to their wards up to Class XII, including to the children of complainant Chada Jain and other similarly situated parents. In this manner, an aggregate amount of approximately ₹55,40,50,000/- was allegedly collected from about 9,155 students. It is further alleged that, after receiving the aforesaid amounts, the accused abruptly closed the Dolphin International Schools operating at various locations, as a result of which all teaching activities came to a halt. On account of the alleged fraudulent acts committed by the accused against the parents, a case has been registered at Police Station Saraswati Nagar for offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. On the basis of said offence, the applicant was taken into custody on 30.08.2017.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that, out of a total of 63 prosecution witnesses, only 43 witnesses have been examined till date and the examination of the remaining witnesses is likely to take a considerable period of time. The

¶20

3

¶21

delay in the progress of the trial is not attributable to the applicant. Learned counsel further contends that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 30.08.2017, i.e., for more than eight years, which amounts to prolonged pre-trial incarceration. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed and that the conclusion of the trial is not likely in the near future. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, it is prayed that the applicant be extended the benefit of regular bail.

¶22

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application.

¶23

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

¶24

Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 30.08.2017, i.e., for more than eight years. The charge-sheet has already been filed and the trial is in progress. Out of a total of 63 prosecution witnesses, 43 witnesses have been examined till date, and the examination of the remaining witnesses is likely to take a considerable period of time. The delay in the conclusion of the trial does not appear to be attributable to the applicant. Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and taking into consideration the prolonged period of pre-trial incarceration undergone by the applicant, the stage of the trial, and the likelihood of further delay in its conclusion, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant has made out a case for grant of regular bail.

¶25

4

¶26

Accordingly, the third bail application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the BNSS is allowed. The applicant shall be released on regular bail in connection with Crime No. 82/2011, registered at Police Station Saraswati Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶27

The applicant shall appear before the trial Court on all dates fixed for hearing and shall comply with all conditions imposed under law.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

(Rajani Dubey) Judge

¶30

Ruchi

¶31

RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed byRUCHI YADAV

Rajesh Sharma @ Rajesh Bhanot @ Bhagat v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Sharma @ Rajesh Bhanot @ Bhagat 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

Mayank Soni @ Sonu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sarjan @Sarvan @Sharvan Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajesh @ Loha Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajesh Sharma @ Rajesh Bhanot @ Bhagat Deghraj Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jitendra Sahu Vs State Of C.g.

Kali Bai Vs State Of Chhattisgarh