1 2025:CGHC:10321 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1632 of 2025 Vivek Kumar Sharma S/o Ramesh Kumar Sharma Aged About 34 Years R/o House No.-374, Shanti Nagar, Road No.- 5C, Bhilai, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House OfÏcer- Newai, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Siddharth Rathod, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.03.2025 1. This is the First 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. 287/2024 registered at Police Station : Newai, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. According to the prosecution's case, as per the First Information Report, complainant Hemant Kumar Soni reported that he owns a ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.03.05 10:33:40 +0530 2 jewelry shop called Laxmi Jewelers, where Bhikam Yadav works, and the applicant is related to Bhikam Yadav and frequently visits the shop. On 13.05.2024, at 7 pm, the applicant purchased gold ornaments worth Rs. 18,71,282/- in Bhikam Yadav's presence, paying Rs. 10,00,000/- by cheque and promising to pay the balance by 25.05.2024. However, upon inquiring about the cheque, the complainant discovered that the applicant's account had insufÏcient funds. The applicant then issued another cheque for Rs. 19,60,000/- which was dishonored. The applicant gave a third blank check, but the bank confirmed that the account had no balance. The complainant lodged a complaint, and the applicant was arrested. During the investigation, it was found that the applicant had mortgaged the gold at Mannapuram Gold Finance Limited and received Rs. 11,00,000/-. Laxmi Yadav, the manager of the finance company, was also arrested, and a charge sheet was filed under Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the present applicant has only one criminal antecedent of the similar nature which is also listed today for hearing before this Court, except these cases the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 04.10.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been 3 submitted before the competent Court in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of offence and further the fact that the present applicant has only one criminal antecedent of the similar nature which is also listed today for hearing before this Court, except these cases the applicant has no criminal antecedents. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant has been in jail since 04.10.2024 and the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Vivek Kumar Sharma, involved in Crime No. 287/2024 registered at Police Station : Newai, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. 4 (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce 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 Abhishek