2026:CGHC:12766 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1091 of 2026 Nagesh Kumar Dhara S/o Janardan K. Aged About 52 Years R/o Ramdas Nagar, Kasargod, P.S. And District Kasargod, Kerala.

... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Supela, District Durg C.G.

... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Deputy Govt. Advocate For Objector : Ms. Mamta Jaiswal, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

Order on Board

17.03.2026

1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 675/2025 registered at Police Station : Supela, District Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. As per the prosecution's story, in brief, is that the present applicant, RAHUL DEWANGAN on the pretext of providing a franchise of a travel agency, induced

Digitally

the complainant, his family members, and acquaintances to part

signed by

RAHUL

DEWANGAN

with a total amount of Rs. 83,80,000/- during the period from 06.09.2022 to 31.12.2022. It is further alleged that despite receiving the said amount, the applicant failed to provide the promised travel agency/franchise, thereby cheating the complainant. On the basis of a written complaint, a crime was registered against the applicant, investigation was carried out, and thereafter a charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. Hence, this bail application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, and that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature arising out of a business transaction. It is submitted that the applicant has not induced or allured the complainant to invest any money, rather the complainant had voluntarily invested at his own risk after completing all legal formalities and had initially derived benefit, but upon incurring losses, has lodged a false and fabricated complaint against the applicant. It is further submitted that one of the co- accused, namely Arti, has already been enlarged on bail by the learned trial Court, and the case of the present applicant stands on similar footing. He also submits that the applicant is engaged in share market work and he has two criminal antecedents of the year 2019 and 2024 which are pending and he is in jail since 12.06.2025 and the conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant.

4. On the other hand learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the objector/complainant opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant has committed a serious offence of cheating by dishonestly inducing the complainant and others to part with a huge amount of Rs. 83,80,000/- on the false pretext of providing a travel agency franchise. It is further submitted that the allegations are supported by material collected during investigation. It is further submitted that the applicant has two criminal antecedents of the year 2019 and 2024 which are pending. Considering the magnitude of the amount involved, the nature of the offence, and the conduct of the applicant, it is prayed that the present applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail.

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

6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the allegations, and the fact that though the applicant has committed a serious offence of cheating by dishonestly inducing the complainant and others to part with a huge amount of Rs. 83,80,000/- on the false pretext of providing a travel agency franchise and furt