Bail granted after considering applicant's socio-economic status, family responsibilities, and lack of flight risk.

The applicant, Mohit, filed a first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for regular bail in connection with Crime No. 99 of 2025 at Police Station- Badawada, District- Ratlam (M.P.).

The offenses are punishable under Sections 318(4), 340(2), 336, 338 of the BNS, 2023.

Mohit has been in judicial custody since 11/12/2025.

The complaint, filed by Aditya Chhipani, alleges that Mohit Sancheti (applicant) and others (Mayur @ Nishit Bafna, Pradeep Bafna, Shalini Bafna) defrauded him by falsely promising LED T.V.s at lower prices and executing a registered sale deed for land.

The complainant paid a total of Rs. 1,40,80,000/- but did not receive the goods or the sale deed, and it was alleged that cheques and agreements were forged.

Nhe applicant claims false implication due to his relation to Pradeep, characterizing the matter as a commercial civil dispute concerning specific performance of a contract and sale of goods.

A registered sale-deed in furtherance of a settlement agreement was executed on 11.09.2025, and the applicant states he returned the money received in his account.

A co-accused, Mayur @ Nishit, was granted bail on 18/09/2025 in MCRC no. 24126 of 2025.

The State opposed bail, citing the gravity of the alleged offense and two criminal antecedents of the applicant.

The applicant clarified one antecedent resulted in imprisonment of TRC and a fine, while the other is pending.

1. Whether the applicant, Mohit, should be granted regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023.

The court primarily applied Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, which governs the grant of regular bail.

The court considered general principles of bail jurisprudence, such as the gravity of the offense, the likelihood of the applicant fleeing from justice, tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, and the applicant's socio-economic status.

The court also noted the precedent of a co-accused being granted bail.

The court considered the applicant's contention that he was falsely implicated in what he described as a commercial civil dispute, rather than a criminal offense.

The court noted the applicant's claim that a settlement agreement leading to a registered sale-deed was executed and that he had returned the money received.

The fact that a co-accused, Mayur @ Nishit, had already been granted bail was also weighed.

Despite the State's opposition based on the gravity of the offense and the applicant's criminal antecedents (one sentenced to TRC and fine, another pending trial), the court found prima facie merit in the applicant's contentions.

The court observed that the applicant, aged around 30 and a businessman with family responsibilities, showed no likelihood of fleeing from justice, tampering with evidence, or influencing witnesses, particularly considering his socio-economic status.

The court concluded there was no compelling reason to continue the applicant's incarceration, without delving into the merits of the case.

The applicant, Mohit, is to be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 99 of 2025, upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 75,000/- with one surety of the same amount, subject to specific conditions.

These conditions include remaining present at hearings, not committing similar offenses, not inducing/threatening witnesses, not tampering with evidence, and ensuring compliance with Section 309 of Cr.P.C./346 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 regarding witness examination.

This order will remain effective until the end of the trial, with a provision for cancellation of bail in case of breach of preconditions.