[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Danish Khan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12135
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
GOURI MCRC No. 993 of 2026
MUDALIAR
Danish Khan S/o Anwar Khan Aged About 46 Years R/o Gaytri Nagar, S.B.S.
Digitally signed by
GOURI MUDALIAR Colony, Tehsil And District- Korba, Chhattisgarh
Date: 2026.03.16
12:25:27 +0530 ...Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Kotwali, Korba District- Korba
Chhattisgarh
... Respondent
For Applicant : Shri Rakesh Kumar Kashyap, Advocate.
For : Shri Soumya Rai, Dy.G.A.
Respondent/State
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
13/03/2026
1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of regular
bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with FIR
No.0296/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Korba District
Korba, Chhattisgarh for the offence punishable under Section 420 of
Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that in the month of October, 2022,
the complainant whose name is Manoj Kumar Yadav, alleges that
applicant Danish Khan demanded Rs. 1,75,000/- (one lakh seventy-
five thousand rupees) in the name of providing job as a computer
operator. The complainant gave 1,70,000/- (one lakh seventy thousand
rupees) in cash and sent Rs. 5000/- (Five thousand rupees) by another
person named Ramesh Kaushik to the applicant via PAYTM. The
applicant has been misguiding him on the name of job since last two
years. On the said note, a FIR has been registered against the
applicant dated 25.04.2025 for the alleged offence under section 420,
Indian Penal Code, 1860. Thereafter on 19.12.2025 the chargesheet
has been filed in the present matter for the alleged offence under
section 420, Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that no seizure
has been made from the possession of the applicant in connection with
the present crime. It is further submitted that even as per the
prosecution story, the dispute appears to have arisen out of an alleged
payment of Rs.1,70,000/- in cash and Rs.5,000/- transferred through
Paytm, and there is no substantial material to establish that the said
amount was given for the purpose of securing a job. He would submit
that the applicant is 46 years of age, working as a driver, and is the
sole earning member of his family. He would submit that the charge
sheet has been filed in this case, the applicant is in jail since
11/12/2025 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he
prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application
and he would submit that charge sheet has been filed in this case
before the competent court and the applicant has no criminal
antecedents.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the
case diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature of allegation levelled against the applicant, period of detention
of the applicant since 11/12/2025, charge sheet has been filed,
applicant has no criminal antecedents and also considering the fact
that trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore this
Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail
in this case.
7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the
Applicant-Danish Khan, involved in FIR No.0296/2025 registered at
Police Station Kotwali, Korba District Korba, Chhattisgarh for the
offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, be
released on bail on his furnishing a 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 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
for necessary information and compliance.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
CHIEF JUSTICE
gouri
