YASHPAL SINGH YADAV vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010338322026
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 8127 of 2026
Yashpal Singh Yadav S/o Shri Jayhind Yadav Aged About 29 Years R/o
Village Kunwarpura, P.S. Niwadi, District- Niwadi (M.P.)
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, (S.H.O.) P.S.
Gidam District- South Bastar, Dantewada (C.G.)

.. Non-Applicant(s)
For Applicant : Ms. Sareena Khan, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Dy. Adv. Gen.
For Objector : Mr. Narendra Kumar, Advocate.
Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge
Order on Board
04/11/2026
This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section
1.
483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of
regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.
37/2025, registered at Police Station Gidam, District Dantewada
(C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and
319(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66-D of

2
the Information Technology Act, 2000.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that the applicant allegedly
2.
induced the complainant, Sadhuram Kunjam, by informing him
that he had won a lottery and would be given a Pulsar motorcycle.
On the pretext of processing fees for the said lottery, the applicant
allegedly obtained a sum of Rs.47,850/- from the complainant. On
the basis of the complaint, the aforesaid offences were registered
against the applicant at Police Station Gidam, District Dantewada
(C.G.).
Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant
3.
is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case.
He would further submit that the applicant has already refunded
the entire amount of Rs.47,850/- to the complainant. It is further
submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the
competent Court, the applicant is in jail since 17.08.2026 and so
far as his criminal antecedents are concerned, the same have
been disclosed in paragraph 4-A of the bail application. The
conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. On these
grounds, learned counsel prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the
4.
prayer for grant of bail and submit that the applicant has two
criminal antecedents. However, he would fairly submit that the
applicant has refunded the amount of Rs.47,850/- to the
complainant. Nevertheless, looking to the manner in which the

3
alleged offence has been committed, the applicant is not entitled
to be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the objector would submit that the applicant
5.
has already refunded the entire amount of Rs.47,850/- to the
complainant and the complainant has received the said amount.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case,
7.
nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the applicant,
particularly the fact that the amount of Rs.47,850/- allegedly
obtained from the complainant on the pretext of lottery processing
fees has already been refunded by the applicant and the
complainant has received the said amount, further considering the
fact that the applicant has two criminal antecedents pertaining to
the years 2022 and 2025, charge-sheet has already been filed
before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since
17.08.2026 thus, without further commenting upon the merits of
the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed . It is
8.
directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal
bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to
the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released
on bail on the following conditions:-

4
(i) 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;
(ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be
prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, &
(iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each
and every date given to him by the said Court till
disposal of the trial.
- S/- Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
Judge
Kunal