Chattisgarh High Court
Ramzan Khan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 5 May, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:20975
Digitally
signed by
VAISHALI
VAISHALI LUCKY
NAFR
LUCKY NAGARIA
NAGARIA Date:
2026.05.06
17:37:27 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
+0530
MCRC No. 4027 of 2026
• Ramzan Khan S/o Late Abdul Khan Aged About 31 Years R/o -House
No. -309, Ward No. -36, Subhash Nagar Moudhapara District Raipur
C.G.
... Applicant(s)
versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Ganj, District- Raipur
C.G.
... Respondent(s)
(Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sameer Rigri, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Government Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 05.05.2026
1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 249/2023 registered at Police Station-Ganj, District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120-B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The first bail application filed by the applicant was rejected by this Court in MCRC No.3889 of 2025 vide order dated 20.05.2025 on the ground that applicant was absconded during the pendency of the 2 trial.
3. The prosecution story in brief is that, applicant Pramod Kumar Markande lodged a report to the effect that in the year 2022, he met a person named Uttam Markam through his village acquaintance Rasheed Banjare, through whom in the month of July 2022, the applicant met Ashish Banjare alias Rahul at Fafadeep Chowk, where Ashish Banjare said that he can get the applicant a Group D job in the railways, the accused Ashish Banjare, in collusion with co- accused Adri alias Bhairav, Manoj Sharma, Ramzan Khan, Ejazuddin Khan alias Iju, in a pre- planned manner, in the name of getting a job in the railways by giving fake documents and making the applicant and Jeevan Kumar, B. Srinivas, Dharma Rao, Pawan Kumar, Dileshwar Juri, Krishna Tiwari, Rahul Kumar Sahu, Khilesh Kumar, During the police investigation, two accused persons, Santosh Kujur and Prabhakar, were arrested. After investigation, the police filed a final report against them for offences punishable under Sections 325, 397, and 427 read with Section 34 of the IPC. A charge sheet was filed before the competent court. However, two accused persons, Hemant Goswami and Puneshwar Khute (the present accused/applicant), were declared absconding, and the charge sheet was filed under Section 173(8) of the CrPC. The charge sheet was filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Janakpur, and registered as Criminal Case No. 180/2016 on 28.11.2016. Given the nature of the offences, the case was committed to the Sessions Court for trial and transferred as Sessions Trial No. 104/2016 on 29.11.2016. During the trial, the court examined eleven witnesses to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. On 25.02.2019, the Sessions Judge acquitted two accused persons, Santosh Kujur and 3 Prabhakar Singh, of the charges against them. In the present case, a permanent warrant was issued against the applicant to execute the pending proceedings. The police arrested the present accused/applicant from the address mentioned in the charge sheet and FIR on 25.04.2025.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further contended that the first bail application filed by the applicant was rejected by this Court in MCRC No.3889 of 2025 vide order dated 20.05.2025 on the ground that applicant was absconded during the pendency of the trial.. He submits that applicant has not committed any crime and a false case has been forcibly made by the Police. He also submits that the main accused Ashish Banjare has been acquitted and freed by the Special Railway magistrate on 19.03.2024 in crime No.249 of 2023. He further submits that there are total six prosecution witnesses, out of which only two prosecution witnesses have been examined and they have turned hostile before the learned trial Court and have not supported the prosecution case. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 15.01.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application of the applicant.
6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this 4 Court in MCRC No. 3889 of 2025 vide order dated 20.05.2025 on the ground that the applicant was absconding during the pendency of the trial, this Court proceeds to consider the present application, furthermore, out of six prosecution witnesses, two have been examined and have turned hostile; however, the said circumstance alone is not sufficient for grant of bail, and applicant remained absconding and his trial was separated from the co-accused, who has already been acquitted by the trial Court. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant - Ramzan Khan, involved in Crime No.249/2023 registered at Police Station-Ganj, District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120-B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, is rejected.
9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously.
10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Vaishali