LILADHAR SHIVAJI WAGHMARE vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010286702026 2026:CGHC:38419
NAFR
VAIBHAV
SINGH
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed by
VAIBHAV SINGH
Date: 2026.09.01
11:07:29 +0530
MCRC No. 6972 of 2026
1 - Liladhar Shivaji Waghmare S/o Shivaji Waghmare, Aged About 34 Years
Resident Of Village Mhasepathar, Shankarpat, Post Mohpa, District Nagpur,
Maharashtra
2 - Bhola Pisaram Gavate, S/o Pisaram Gavate, Aged About 40 Years
Resident Of Village Nandikheda, Police Station Mohpa, District Nagpur,
Maharashtra
3 - Mukesh Pisaram Soneshwar, S/o Pisaram Soneshwar, Aged About 31
Years Resident Of Village Parsodi Vakil, Post Pipla, Police Station Mohpa,
District Nagpur, Maharashtra
4 - Parmeshwar Pisaram Eknath, S/o Pisaram Eknath, Aged About 37 Years
Resident Of Village Selu, Post Kalmabi, Tehsil Kaalmeshwar, Police Station
Kaalmeshwar, District Nagpur, Maharashtra
5 - Dinesh Ishwar Soneshwar, S/o Ishwar Soneshwar, Aged About 31 Years
Resident Of Village Deshmukh, Post Pardi, Police Station Mohpa, District
Nagpur, Maharashtra ... Applicants

versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station
Bande, District Uttar Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh ...Non-applicant

For Applicants : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board

2
31.08.2026
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.
51/2026 registered at Police Station – Bande, District Uttar Bastar
Kanker (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 308(5),
318(4), 354, 61(2) of the BNS.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 25.06.2026, the complainant,
namely Balram Sarkar, resident of P.V. 104 Deepganar, lodged a
written report at Police Station Bande alleging that on 17.05.2026 at
about 12:00 noon, an unknown person dressed as a Sadhu,
accompanied by a five-legged Nandi bull, came to his house and,
after seeking donations and performing rituals, told him that gold was
buried in his house and that unless the same was extracted, the
illness of his family members would not be eradicated and he would
not become wealthy. The said person provided his mobile number and
instructed the complainant to purchase Swayam Sundari Bhasma
worth Rs.52,000/-. Accordingly, the complainant went to Gadchiroli
and, as instructed, purchased one gram of the said medicine from
Maa Jamuna Ayurvedic Shop for Rs.52,000/-. Thereafter, on
02.06.2026, the said unknown person along with two other persons
came to the complainant's house in a car and performed puja at
midnight in the process of extracting the alleged gold and took out a
small pot, which appeared to contain a gold biscuit, and sealed the
same in a red cloth while threatening the complainant not to open it,
stating that doing so would result in the death of a member of his

3
family. The accused persons thereafter instructed the complainant to
procure Nav Jeevan Amrit Bhasma, initially 5 grams and subsequently
2 grams, which the complainant purchased from the same shop for
Rs.4,44,000/-, and further purchased other medicines and puja
material, allegedly spending a total amount of approximately
Rs.4,96,000/- towards the medicines and Rs.4,000/- towards puja
material. When the complainant was subsequently pressured to
purchase another 3 grams of the said medicine and was unable to
arrange the money, he opened the sealed pot and found 21 gold-
coloured idols, which upon rubbing were found to be made of brass.
Thus, alleging that he had been induced and cheated by the unknown
persons by falsely representing that gold was buried in his house and
by threatening him with dire consequences, the complainant lodged
the written report, on the basis of which the FIR was registered
against the owner/shopkeeper of Maa Jamuna Ayurvedic Shop and
other unknown persons, and the matter is presently under
investigation. The applicants thereafter moved an application for
regular bail before the Court below, which came to be rejected, and
hence the present first regular bail application has been preferred
before this Hon’ble Court.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are
innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is
further submitted that the applicants never compelled or insisted upon
the complainant to purchase medicines or puja articles worth
approximately Rs.5,00,000/- and that the complainant himself
voluntarily agreed to perform the suggested puja for extraction of gold.
Learned counsel submits that the complainant himself went to the

4
shop and purchased Swayam Sundari Bhasma and Nav Jeevan Amrit
Bhasma from the shopkeeper of Maa Jamuna Ayurvedic Shop and
paid the entire amount to the shopkeeper, whereas not a single penny
was received by the applicants. It is further submitted that the
applicants had merely suggested certain puja rituals for the well-being
and healthier life of the complainant's family and had not obtained any
money from him. Learned counsel further submits that the entire
amount was paid by the complainant to the shopkeeper and,
therefore, the applicants have no financial benefit from the alleged
transaction. It is also submitted that applicant Nos.1 to 3 have no
criminal antecedents and are first offenders, whereas applicant Nos.4
and 5 have the criminal cases referred to in the application pending
against them, and except the same, no other criminal case is pending
against the applicants. It is further submitted that the applicants have
been in custody since 30.06.2026, the charge-sheet has not yet been
filed and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion.
Learned counsel further submits that the applicants are permanent
residents of the addresses mentioned in the cause title, there is no
likelihood of their absconding or tampering with the prosecution
evidence, and they are ready to furnish adequate security and abide
by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble
Court. Hence, the applicants pray that they may kindly be released on
regular bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application
of the present applicants and submits that the applicants No. 4 and 5
have one previous criminal antecedent.

5
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the
nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the applicants, the
period of detention, as the applicants have been in judicial custody
since 30.06.2026, the fact that charge-sheet has already been filed
before the competent Court, and that the conclusion of the trial is
likely to take considerable time, this Court is inclined to grant regular
bail to the applicants.
7. Let the Applicants – Liladhar Shivaji Waghmare, Bhola Pisaram
Gavate, Mukesh Pisaram Soneshwar, Parmeshwar Pisaram
Eknath & Dinesh Ishwar Soneshwar involved in Crime No. 51/2026
registered at Police Station – Bande, District Uttar Bastar Kanker
(C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 308(5), 318(4),
354, 61(2) of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing personal
bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction
of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants misuses the liberty of bail

6
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 applicants 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 them 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
Vaibhav