[Cites 11, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Kailash Choudhary vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 8 April, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:16170
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 3149 of 2026
Kailash Choudhary S/o Hanuman Choudhary, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Jato
Ka Mohalla, Village Sirohi Kala, P.S. Narena, District Jaipur Rural, At Present
Ward No. 15, Sunder Nagar, Madanganj Kishangarh, P.S. Gandhi Nagar,
District Ajmer, Rajasthan
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali,
Digitally
Balodabazar, District - BalodaBazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh
signed by
PREETI
PREETI
KUMARI ... Non-Applicant
KUMARI Date:
2026.04.09
13:26:51
+0530
For Applicant : Mr. Rahul Ambast, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Government Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
08.04.2026
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 FIR/Crime No. 0307/2025,
registered at Police Station - City Kotwali, Balodabazar, District -
BalodaBazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections
318(4), 316(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. As per the brief facts of the prosecution case, it is alleged that during the
period from 23.07.2024 to 19.10.2024, the complainant, Ramchandra
Vastrakar, was cheated of a sum of Rs. 8,06,640/- by the accused
persons, who operated a company named VIP Trade, on the pretext of
investing money with the assurance that the complainant would receive a
monthly interest of 10-12%. A copy of FIR No. 0307/2025, registered on
26.03.2025, is filed herewith and marked as Annexure A/3.
3. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further
submitted that the company, namely "VIP Trade," is allegedly being
operated by the main accused, Lokesh Choudhary, who is responsible for
making investments and dealing with clients, and that the present
applicant has no role in either handling clients or investing money.
Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is merely an employee
of the said Lokesh Choudhary and is working as his driver. It is also
submitted that although the applicant has certain previous criminal
antecedents, the same have been duly explained in paragraph No. 4(a) of
the present bail application. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet
has already been filed. The pplicant has been arrested on 28.12.2025 in
connection with another FIR No. 135/2025 registered on 12.04.2025 at
Police Station Gandhi Nagar, District Ajmer, Rajasthan, for the alleged
commission of offence(s) punishable under Section 420, 406, 120-B, 384
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 whereby the present applicant has been
granted bail on 05.03.2026 by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature for
Rajasthan bench at Jaipur and a production warrant has been issued
against him on 04.02.2026 by the learned CJM, Baloda Bazaar in related
to FIR dated 26.03.2025 for offence under Section 318(4), 316(2) and
3(5) of BNS, FIR No. 307/2025 whereby, the present applicant was
produced before the learned CJM on 12.03.2026. Therefore, it is prayed
that the applicant be enlarged on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the bail application
and submitted that from a perusal of the case diary, it is revealed that the
complainant, Ramchandra Vastrakar, lodged a report alleging that during
the period from 23.07.2024 to 19.10.2024, the applicant, along with other
co-accused persons, formed a company in the name and style of "VIP
Trade" and, by inducing the complainant with a false promise of providing
returns at the rate of 10% to 12% per month, dishonestly and fraudulently
collected a sum of Rs. 8,06,640/- from him. Therefore, it is argued that
the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
documents available on record.
6. 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 company, namely "VIP Trade," is allegedly being operated by
the main accused, Lokesh Choudhary, who is responsible for making
investments and dealing with clients, and that the present applicant has
no role in either handling clients or investing money, also considering the
fact that the applicant is merely an employee of the said Lokesh
Choudhary and is working as his driver, further the applicant has certain
previous criminal antecedents, the same have been duly explained in
paragraph No. 4(a) of the present bail application, the charge-sheet has
already been filed before the competent Court, this Court is of the opinion
that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case.
7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant -
Kailash Choudhary, involved in FIR/Crime No. 0307/2025, registered at
Police Station - City Kotwali, Balodabazar, District - BalodaBazar-
Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4),
316(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on
his furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to
the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect
that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates
fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in
court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open
for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and
pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial
court on each date fixed, either personally or through his
counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause,
the trial court may proceed against him under Section
269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail
during trial and in order to secure his presence,
proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and
the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date
fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall
initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law,
under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person,
before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of
the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of
statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion
of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or
without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial
court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and
proceed against him in accordance with law.
8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court
concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Preeti
