Anticipatory bail denied where prima facie evidence indicates fraudulent inducement and misappropriation of educational consultancy fees.

The applicant, Rakesh Kapri, sought anticipatory bail regarding Crime No. 0041/2024 registered at Police Station Civil Line, Korba, for allegedly defrauding the complainant, Aftab Ahmed.

The complainant alleged that the applicant misrepresented himself as a consultant and promised to secure admission for a Diploma course at the College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Relying on these assurances, the complainant transferred ₹22,25,000/- via online transactions to the applicant between 2020 and 2024.

The FIR was lodged in 2024 after the applicant failed to secure the admission or refund the money.

The applicant contended the dispute was purely contractual, delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic, and that the four-year delay in filing the FIR suggested afterthought.

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, given the allegations of fraud and the claim of being absconding?

The court primarily applied Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (corresponding to Section 438 of the CrPC), which governs the discretionary power of the High Court to grant bail to a person apprehending arrest.

Sections 420 (cheating) and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), focusing on the necessity of custodial interrogation and the conduct of the accused—specifically whether the accused has been absconding or cooperating with the legal process.

The Court evaluated the gravity of the offense, noting that the allegations were serious as they involved a substantial financial loss of ₹22,25,000/- to the complainant based on false representations.

While the applicant argued the matter was a civil/contractual dispute exacerbated by the pandemic, the Court observed that prima facie evidence indicated a failure to fulfill the promise or return the funds after receiving payment.

Crucially, the Court took note of the State’s submission that the applicant had been absconding since the registration of the case in 2024.

The Court reasoned that the combination of the serious nature of the fraud and the applicant's conduct in evading the investigation disentitled him to the equitable relief of anticipatory bail.

The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.