Allowed

Shiv Kumar Mangore v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC14 Sept 2026MCRC/7527/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application for offences under BNS sections 318(4) and 3(5), the High Court of Chhattisgarh granted bail allowing a personal bond with one surety. The court noted the co-accused was already released on bail and the charge-sheet had been filed.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed; directed to execute personal bond for Rs. 50,000/- with one surety.

Shiv Kumar Mangore Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

CGHC010315082026 Digitally signed byREKHA SINGH DN: cn=REKHA REKHA SINGH, ou=HIGHCOURT, o=HIGH COURT OF SINGH CHHATTISGARH,st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.09.15 15:05:21 +0530

¶3

2026:CGHC:40196

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MCRC No. 7527 of 2026

¶7

1 - Shiv Kumar Mangore S/o. Jageshwar Mangore, Aged About 25 Years R/o. Sharda Para, J. P. Nagar. Camp-2, Bhilai, Police Station - Chhawani, Tehsil And District - Durg (C.G.)

¶8

... Applicant

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Chowki - Smriti Nagar, P. S. - Supela, District Durg (C.G.) (Wrongly Mentioned As Police Station - Supela In The Cause Title Of The Impugned Order)

¶11

	---Non-applicant
For Applicant	: Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate
For Non-applicant	: Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal PL

¶12

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶13

Order On Board

¶14

15.09.2026

¶15

1) The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.588/2026 registered at Police Station-Supela Chowki, Smriti Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence under Section 318(4) and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶16

¶17

2) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a complaint was lodged by Vijay Bhargava on 28.04.2026 to the effect that he is a retired employee of Bhilai Steel Plant, who received a call from Cell No. 7908519455, whereby he was requested to provide his Aadhaar Card, Debit Card and bank account details for preparation of a pension card. The complainant provided those documents and, subsequently, a sum of Rs.8,90,000/- was transferred from his account. A sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was transferred to the bank account of the present applicant, whereas a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- was transferred to the bank account of Atmaram. On such complaint, the police registered the offences as stated above.

¶18

3) Ms. Singhvi, learned counsel appearing for the applicant would argue that, in the present case, the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant is in jail since 06.05.2026, and co-accused Atmaram, in whose account a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- was transferred, was released on bail after furnishing surety by the Station House Officer of Police Station Supela under the provisions of Section 35(1)(B)(2) of the BNSS. Therefore, she prays for the grant of regular bail to the present applicant.

¶19

4) On the other hand, the learned State counsel would oppose the bail application and submit that there is one criminal antecedent of the present applicant, registered under Section 36(c) of the C.G. Excise Act. Mr. Jaiswal would submit that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case and a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was transferred to his bank account; therefore, the application deserves to be rejected.

¶20

5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶21

¶22

6) Having considered the fact that co-accused Atmaram, in whose account a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- was transferred, was released on bail by the Station House Officer in accordance with the provisions of Section 35(1)(B) of the BNSS, and further, the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant is in jail since 06.05.2026, and only a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was transferred to his account, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 is allowed .

¶23

It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

¶24

(i) he 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;

¶25

(ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, &

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE

¶30

Rekha

Shiv Kumar Mangore v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar Mangore v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases