Chattisgarh High Court
Rohit Dhritlahare vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:11435
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 360 of 2026
Rohit Dhritlahare S/o Bhav Singh Dhritlahare Aged About 39 Years R/o
House No. 41, Laxmipara, Ward No. 03, Devgaon Khauna, Tehsil Kharora,
Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ...Applicant
VAIBHAV
SINGH
Digitally signed
by VAIBHAV
SINGH
versus
Date: 2026.03.11
10:37:42 +0530
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Saraswati Nagar,
Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ...Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. G.A.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
10.03.2026
1.This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.20/2026, registered at Police Station - Saraswati Nagar, District. Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 61(2) of the BNS 2023.
2
2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, a report was made on the allegation that the accused persons induced the complainant company in connection with a proposed immovable property transaction to part with substantial sums of money on the assurance that the property was free from encumbrances and legally transferable. Pursuant to meetings between the parties, an Agreement to Sell dated 16.12.2025 was executed and payments totaling approximately Rs.11.51 crores were made through banking channels. It is further alleged that the property was already mortgaged with financial institutions and was subject to recovery proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, a fact allegedly suppressed from the complainant, there by causing wrongful loss to the complainant. Based on these allegations, offences u/s 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 61(2) of BNS, 2023 as mentioned above were registered against the present applicant.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that even if the entire prosecution case is taken at its face value, no offence under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 61(2) of the BNS, 2023 is made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is neither the director, promoter, shareholder nor the seller of the property in question and had merely acted as a broker connecting the buyer and the seller, without receiving any money or benefit from the execution of the sale agreement. It is also submitted that the FIR has not been registered against the present applicant and there is no allegation therein regarding his involvement in any conspiracy with the seller. Learned counsel further submits that the co-accused Vinod Bajorai has already been granted anticipatory bail 3 vide order dated 03.02.2026 passed in MCRCA No. 167/2026, and other co-accused namely Shri Narayan Prasad Tekriwal, Pritam Tekriwal and Pankaj Tekriwal have been granted regular bail vide orders dated 13.02.2026 passed in MCRC Nos. 1605/2026, 1598/2026 and 1565/2026 respectively. It is also submitted that the dispute between the parties has already been amicably compromised, as reflected in the bail orders of the co-accused persons. It is further contended that the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required, and the applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court while granting bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the anticipatory bail application of the present applicant.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the dispute and the material available on record, and further taking into consideration the fact that co-accused Vinod Bajorai has already been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 03.02.2026 passed in MCRCA No. 167/2026 and the other co-accused, namely Shri Narayan Prasad Tekriwal, Pritam Tekriwal and Pankaj Tekriwal, have been granted regular bail vide orders dated 13.02.2026 passed in MCRC Nos. 1605/2026, 1598/2026 and 1565/2026 respectively, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of parity to the present 4 applicant. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present bail application is allowed.
7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant - Rohit Dhritlahare , on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-
(a) 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.
(b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.
(c) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.
(d) the applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court.
(e) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Vaibhav