RAMGOPAL YADAV ALIAS NANKIDAU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010329532026 2026:CGHC:38567
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
NAFR
Digitally
signed by
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 7849 of 2026
Ramgopal Yadav Alias Nankidau S/o Shri Mangalchand Yadav Aged
About 58 Years R/o Village- Ward No.26, Jagdalla, Champa, P.S. And
Tehsil- Champa, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station -
Champa, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
---- Non-Applicant(s)
: Mr. Vivek Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate.
For Applicant
For Non-Applicant : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. Govt. Adv.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
01/09/2026
1. The applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular
bail who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 286/2026
registered at Police Station Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336, 338 and
340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. As per the case of prosecution, the complainant Gaurkaran Patel
submitted a written complaint alleging that he had agreed to

2
purchase land bearing Khasra Nos. 2148/2, admeasuring 34
decimals, and 2145/2, admeasuring 37 decimals, for a total
consideration of ₹6,35,000/-. An agreement to sell was executed
and an advance amount of ₹50,000/- was allegedly paid to
Ramgopal Yadav and his son Munna Yadav. Thereafter, on
05.03.2025, the aforesaid lands were registered in favour of the
complainant and the remaining amount was allegedly paid through
cheque. Subsequently, when the complainant approached the
Tehsil Office for mutation, he came to know that the land bearing
Khasra No. 2148/2 had allegedly been sold earlier by Ramgopal
Yadav to Ramphal Kashyap in the year 1996. It is further alleged
that taking advantage of the land not having been mutated in the
name of Ramphal Kashyap, a second land record was prepared in
the year 2024 and the said land was again sold in favour of the
applicant's wife, Sukrita Bai, and thereafter to the complainant.
During investigation, the applicant's memorandum statement was
recorded on 03.08.2026, wherein he allegedly admitted fabrication
of documents relating to the aforesaid land. After completion of
investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent
Court.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is
submitted that the dispute essentially arises out of a land
transaction and is predominantly civil in nature. The applicant's
elder brother Shatruhan had allegedly sold his share of 34 decimals
of land to Ramphal Kashyap, which was not within the knowledge of

3
the applicant and the said land subsequently came to the applicant
in a family partition. It is further submitted that the land stood
recorded in the name of the applicant in the revenue records since
the year 2022-23. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and
the applicant is in custody since 03.08.2026 and charge-sheet has
already been filed before the competent Court and the trial is likely
to take some time for its conclusion. Hence, it is prayed that the
applicant may kindly be enlarged on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for
grant of bail and submits that the applicant is alleged to have been
involved in fabrication of land records and thereby facilitated the
sale of the disputed land, causing wrongful loss to the complainant.
Accordingly, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of
allegations, the fact that the dispute arises out of a land transaction
and the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in custody
since 03.08.2026 and further the charge-sheet has already been
filed before the competent Court and the trial is likely to take some
time for its conclusion, thus without commenting on the merits of the
case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant
deserves to be enlarged on bail.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed .
8. Let the Applicant- Ramgopal Yadav ailas Nankidau, involved in

4
Crime No. 286/2026 registered at Police Station Champa, District
Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections
318(4), 336, 338 and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,
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,

5
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.
9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Kunal