Chattisgarh High Court
Leeladhar Prasad Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 19 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:13168
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 420 of 2026
Leeladhar Prasad Sahu S/o Ghasiram Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o
Champa (Ward No. 20) P.S. Champa District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O. Police Station- Kasdol District-
Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Nishi Kant Sinha, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh K. Pande, Deputy Advocate
General.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Digitally signed
ABHISHEK
by ABHISHEK
SHRIVAS Order On Board
SHRIVAS Date:
19.03.2026
2026.03.19
18:20:43 +0530
[
1.The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 433/2025, registered at Police Station - Kasdol, District - Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5), 318(3), 3(5) and 111 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. As per the prosecution story, it is alleged that on 25.08.2023, the complainant, Chhedilal Sahu, went to the house of the applicants to 2 meet Ramnarayan Sahu and his son, Gulshan Sahu. During the meeting, he was induced to invest in share trading on the assurance that the invested amount would be doubled. Relying on such assurance, the complainant invested Rs. 20,00,000/- through RTGS and the remaining amount in cash. In total, a sum of Rs. 39,10,000/- was invested, which was promised to be doubled within a period of two years. However, the applicants did not return the amount, thereby committing cheating against the complainant. Hence, the offence has been registered.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the name of the present applicant does not find place in the FIR, nor in the statements of any of the witnesses. The applicant has been arrayed as an accused in the present offence merely on the basis of the memorandum of the co-accused, Ram Narayan Sahu, who has allegedly stated that the applicant had invested Rs. 10 crore with him in the share market business. However, there is no specific allegation against the present applicant regarding his involvement in the aforesaid offence. He also submits that the other co-accused persons, namely Janak Sagar, Anita Devi Sahu, Kumari Kusum Rani Sahu, Janki Sahu, and Shweta Avsariya, have already been granted regular bail, and the other co-accused persons, namely Shahsi Sahu and Ranu Dhruv, have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. He further submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant.
3
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 made by learned counsel for the applicant, and the material available on record, this Court observes that the name of the present applicant does not find mention in the FIR or in the statements of any of the witnesses, and his implication appears to be based solely on the memorandum of the co-accused. There is no specific allegation regarding the involvement of the present applicant in the alleged offence. Further, taking into consideration that similarly placed co- accused persons have already been granted regular as well as anticipatory bail by this Court, the case of the present applicant is distinguished from the case of the aforesaid co-accused persons who have granted regular bail by this Court, moreover, the fact that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents, therefore, without further consideration on merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.
7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant - Leeladhar Prasad Sahu, 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 4 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 Abhishek