1 2025:CGHC:11220 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1825 of 2025 Santosh Das Manikpuri S/o Sukrit Das Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Rogda, P.S. Navagarh, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Navagarh, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ajay Ayachi, Advocate. For Non-Applicant(s) : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Deputy A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 06.03.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 517/2024, registered at Police Station Navagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 111(1), 3(5) of BNS and Section 6 and 10 of Protection of Depositors Interest Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that since 2023, the AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 applicant/accused Santosh Das, manager of A-Flora Max Service Private Limited Company, and other co-accused persons, in a planned manner, lured people from Champa and surrounding villages with promises of high profits and commissions, collecting Rs.30,000/- per person from approximately 2,700/- people, totaling Rs.8,10,00,000/-. They promised to pay Rs 2,700/- per month and commission but instead absconded after closing the company's office. As per the accused's statement, he was initially appointed as a manager and later worked in the field with others, collecting Rs.30,000/- from 130 people and depositing it into the company. He also received a commission of Rs.8 lakh, which he claimed to have recorded in a register and laptop. The applicant/accused Santosh Das, in collusion with the company's directors, Akhilesh Singh and Raju Singh, committed the said offense, leading to charges being filed against the applicant/accused and others under sections 318(2), 318(4), 111(1), 3(5) BNS and sections 6, 10 of the Depositors' Protection Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submit that only on the basis of memorandum statement of the co-accused persons, present applicant has been made an accused in the case. The applicant is in jail since 28.11.2024 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he 3 prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons had lured the complainant and other surrounding villagers with promises of high profits and commissions, collecting Rs.30,000/- per person from approximately 2,700/- people, totaling Rs.8,10,00,000/-, they promised to pay Rs.2,700/- per month and commission but instead absconded after closing the company's office, causing them great financial loss, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the fact that the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons were alleged to have lured the complainant and other surrounding villagers with promises of high profits and commissions, collecting Rs.30,000/- per person from approximately 2,700/- people, totaling Rs.8,10,00,000/-, they promised to pay Rs.2,700/- per month and commission but instead absconded after closing the company's office, causing great financial loss to complainant and other persons, as such, without expressing any opinion on the 4 merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant-Santosh Das Manikpuri, involved in Crime No. 517/2024, registered at Police Station Navagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 111(1), 3(5) of BNS and Section 6 and 10 of Protection of Depositors Interest Act, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil