[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Hirendra Kumar Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12162
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2393 of 2026
Hirendra Kumar Sahu S/o Bhupendra Kumar Sahu Aged About 21 Years R/o
Village Bilari, Tahsil Pamgarh, P.S. Sheorinarayan, District- Janjgir- Champa
(C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer P.S. Sheorinarayan,
District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Atul Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh K. Pande, Dy. Adv. General
Digitally
signed by
ABHISHEK
ABHISHEK
SHRIVAS
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
SHRIVAS Date:
2026.03.13
18:29:01
+0530 Order on Board
13.03.2026
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. 553/2025 registered
at Police Station Sheorinarayan, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), for the
offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant was informed by
the applicant's father, namely Bhupendra Sahu (co-accused), that he is
engaged in the business of sale and purchase of land and that his son
(the present applicant) trades in the share market. It was further
represented that if the complainant invested some amount, he would
receive double the amount invested as returns. Thereafter, the
complainant allegedly invested a total sum of Rs. 67,17,000/- through
cash as well as online transactions and received a return of Rs.
15,00,000/-. However, as per the allegations, the accused persons
refused to return the remaining amount to the complainant, and therefore
the present FIR has been lodged against the applicant and other
accused persons in Crime No. 553/2025, at Police Station
Sheorinarayan, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), for offences punishable
under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
Thus, the present applicant is being prosecuted in the present case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an
innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case.
He further submits that from a bare reading of the FIR itself, it is clear
that the complainant, despite being aware of the risks involved in the
share market, voluntarily invested the amount, and any loss arising
therefrom cannot be termed as a criminal act on the part of the applicant.
It is further submitted that the applicant has already returned an amount
of Rs. 15,00,000/- to the complainant, which clearly indicates that there
was no dishonest intention to cheat. Therefore, no offence as alleged in
the FIR is made out against the applicant. Learned counsel also submits
that various investors are lodging FIRs at different police stations on
similar allegations, which amounts to an abuse of the process of law. It is
pertinent to mention that the applicant has already been granted bail by
this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 10322/2025 vide order dated 10.02.2026,
wherein similar allegations were levelled against him, and one more case
is pending for consideration. He further submits that the present
applicant is in jail since 08.12.2025 and that the conclusion of the trial
may take considerable time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail
to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail
application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge-sheet
has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present
case. He submits that as per the prosecution case, the applicant along
with his father, co-accused Bhupendra Sahu, induced the complainant to
invest money on the pretext of providing double returns through share
market trading and land business. On such inducement, the complainant
invested a total sum of Rs. 67,17,000/-, out of which only Rs. 15,00,000/-
was returned, and the remaining amount has not been repaid. Therefore,
a prima facie case is made out against the applicant and the offences
under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita are
clearly attracted. Hence, he prays for rejection of the bail application.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the
allegation against the applicant is that he, along with his father, co-
accused Bhupendra Sahu, induced the complainant to invest money on
the pretext of providing double returns through share market trading and
land business. On such inducement, the complainant invested a total
sum of Rs. 67,17,000/-, out of which only Rs. 15,00,000/- was returned
and the remaining amount has not been repaid. However, the case of the
present applicant is distinguishable from that of his father, co-accused
Bhupendra Sahu, who is alleged to have primarily induced the
complainant to invest money in the share trading market. The applicant
has two criminal antecedents, in one case he has already been granted
bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 10322/2025 vide order dated
10.02.2026, wherein similar allegations were levelled against him, and
one more case is pending for consideration. Moreover, the charge-sheet
in the present case has already been submitted before the competent
Court and the applicant has been in judicial custody since 08.12.2025. In
view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the
applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case.
7. Let the Applicant - Hirendra Kumar Sahu, involved in Crime No.
553/2025 registered at Police Station Sheorinarayan, District Janjgir-
Champa (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and
3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on
furnishing personal bond with two 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 his 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court
concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Abhishek
