Bail granted where cheating allegations arose from a monetary vehicle-sale dispute and charge-sheet was filed.

The applicant was arrested in connection with Crime No. 267/2026 registered at Police Station Champa, District Janjgir-Champa, for an offence under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).

The complainant alleged that he agreed to purchase a Fortuner vehicle from the applicant for ₹20,00,000 and paid ₹10,00,000 as part consideration.

The applicant allegedly sold the vehicle to another person and failed to refund the amount.

He thereafter issued Cheque No. 008355 for ₹10,00,000, but payment was stopped and the cheque was dishonoured.

During investigation, the applicant’s memorandum statement was recorded, and a cheque book and mobile phone were seized; verification of the cheque was stated to be pending.

The applicant had been in custody since 19 June 2026, and the charge-sheet had already been filed before the competent court.

Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in respect of the offence under Section 318(4) of the BNS.

Whether the monetary dispute arising from the proposed sale of the vehicle, together with the filing of the charge-sheet and the applicant’s period of custody, justified release on bail.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), which empowers the High Court to grant regular bail to a person accused of an offence and in custody.

The alleged substantive offence was under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, concerning cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.

In exercising bail discretion, the Court considered the nature of the allegations, the prima facie character of the dispute, the filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant’s period of incarceration, and the likely duration of the trial.

The Court found that the allegations primarily arose from a monetary transaction concerning the proposed sale of a vehicle and prima facie bore the character of a civil dispute, notwithstanding their presentation as a criminal case.

The charge-sheet had already been filed, thereby reducing the need for continued custodial detention, while the applicant had remained in custody since 19 June 2026 and the trial was likely to take time.

Without expressing any final opinion on the merits, the Court considered these circumstances sufficient to exercise its discretion in favour of bail.

The State’s objection, including the allegation that the cheque belonged to another person and had been dishonoured due to stopped payment, was considered but did not persuade the Court to deny bail.

The applicant be released on bail upon executing a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

The bail was subject to conditions that the applicant would not influence or threaten witnesses, would not prejudice a fair and expeditious trial, and would appear before the trial court on every date fixed until conclusion of the proceedings.

A certified copy of the order was directed to be sent to the trial court for compliance.