Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 10900
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ
Mukesh Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
MCRC No. 7273 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Girish Pandey
For the Respondents: Mr. Swajeet Singh Ubeja, Mr. Anshul Singhania
The court granted bail highlighting the absence of prior criminal records, evidentiary support, and the trial's expected duration.
Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 318(4), 336, 338, 340 - Bail application - Applicant arrested for fraudulently obtaining money under pretext of job offers - No previous criminal records, charge-sheet filed, trial likely to take time. (Paras 1-8)
(B) Bail consideration - Nature and gravity of charges, previous history of applicant, and evidence collected were crucial factors in deciding the bail application. (Paras 3-7)
Facts of the case:
The applicant was accused of defrauding multiple victims, collecting significant sums under false pretenses. The charge-sheet was filed successfully.
Findings of Court:
The applicant was entitled to bail due to lack of previous criminal antecedents and the nature of the charges.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the severity of the allegations and his circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the applicant posed no flight risk and had complied with previous legal processes.
Result: The bail application is allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application under bail proceedings. (Para 1) |
| 2. details of fraudulent activities by applicants. (Para 2) |
| 3. arguments from both sides regarding bail. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 4. court's overview of the evidence and charges. (Para 6) |
| 5. court's decision rationale for granting bail. (Para 7) |
| 6. final conclusion and conditions for bail. (Para 8) |
Order on Board
11.09 .202 5
1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section
483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Digitally Crime No. 72/2025, registered at Police Station – Azad Chowk, signed by PREETI PREETI KUMARI KUMARI Date:
2025.09.12 District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections
10:48:17 +0530
318(4), 336, 338, 340 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant, Hemlata Sahu, lodged a written complaint at Police Station Azad Chowk on 13.03.2025, alleging that the accused, Mukesh Sahu, falsely introduced himself as a clerk in S.E.C.L. and, under the pretext of marriage and offering her a job, fraudulently obtained Rs.5,38,000 from her via PhonePe. However, he neither arranged the job nor returned the money. Based on this complaint, Crime No. 72/2025 was registered under Sections 318 (4), 336, 338, and 340 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and investigation commenced. During the investigation, it was revealed that the applicant/accused similarly defrauded another complainant, Kuleshwari Hirwani, of Rs.2,47,630 in multiple online transactions under the pretext of employment. Likewise, another complainant was cheated of Rs.28,78,500 in the same manner. Written complaints in these cases were lodged on 02.06.2025 and 22.07.2025, respectively, at the same police station. The applicant/accused was arrested, and after completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed on
11.08.2025.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and no recovery is pending from the applicant, as all alleged transactions were online through PhonePay and the Police have already collected the necessary evidence, including bank statements and digital records, during the investigation. He further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case and the applicant is in jail since 16.06.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case.
5. Learned counsel for the Objector opposes the bail application and submits that proper and sufficient evidence has been collected during the investigation, which clearly indicates that the applicant/accused has committed the offence. He further submits that the applicant is a habitual offender and has committed similar offences against several individuals. Hence, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record.
7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case and the applicant is in jail since 16.06.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted regular bail in this case.
8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let applicant -
Mukesh Sahu, involved in Crime No. 72/2025, registered at Police Station – Azad Chowk, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318 (4), 336, 338, 34
