Facts
The applicant, a 50-year-old resident of Maharashtra, was arrested in connection with Crime No. 51/2026 at Police Station City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara
Source reference: para. 1, 2The complainant, Kamal Sahu, alleged that while seeking medical treatment, he was deceived by the accused who claimed ritualistic rites were required to extract "eight pots of gold and silver" from the complainant's field
Source reference: para. 2The applicant has been in custody since November 23, 2025
Source reference: para. 3While he has no criminal record in Maharashtra, the State noted one antecedent in Madhya Pradesh
Source reference: para. 4Issues
1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, considering his age, health, and the stage of the trial
Source reference: para. 1, 6Law Applied
The Court considered the provisions of Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the High Court's power to grant bail
Source reference: para. 1The offences were registered under Sections 318(4) (cheating) and 61(2) (criminal conspiracy) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)
Source reference: para. 1, 7The Court weighed the liberty of the individual against the necessity of ensuring presence during trial, particularly for an out-of-state resident with a minor criminal antecedent
Source reference: para. 4, 7Reasoning
The Court balanced the gravity of the allegations of deception with the personal circumstances of the applicant. It noted that the applicant is 50 years old, allegedly suffering from a brain hemorrhage, and had already been incarcerated for approximately five months
Source reference: para. 3, 6Although the State opposed bail citing a criminal antecedent in Madhya Pradesh, the Court observed that the charge-sheet had already been filed, meaning the investigation was complete
Source reference: para. 4, 6Given that the trial was expected to take considerable time, the Court reasoned that further detention was unnecessary, provided stringent conditions were imposed to ensure the applicant’s cooperation with the judicial process despite him being a resident of another state
Source reference: para. 6, 7Holding
The Court allowed the application and granted regular bail to the applicant
The holding directed his release upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties, subject to specific conditions: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must appear at every hearing (specifically for framing of charges and recording statements under Section 351 BNSS), and must comply with procedural requirements under Section 269 BNS and Section 84 BNSS in case of default
Source reference: para. 7Original Court PDF
NANASINGHvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in