1 2025:CGHC:12370 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1647 of 2025 Ritesh Kumar Banjare S/o Radheshyam Banjare Aged About 26 Years R/o Bhikhampur, Tehsil Navagarh, Post - Badnara District Bemetara Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - DM, District - Durg Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.03.2025 1. Heard Mr. Abdul Wahab Khan, learned counsel, appearing for the applicant as well as Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate appearing for the non-applicant/State on I.A. No. 01/2025, which is an application for urgent hearing. 2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and reasons mentioned in the application, I am of the considered opinion that sufÏcient cause has been shown in the application and accordingly, I.A. No. 01/2025 is allowed and proceed to hear the matter. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.03.12 16:08:42 +0530 2 3. 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. 144/2024 registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District – Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 4. The prosecution's story, in brief, is that the applicant/accused, along with other co-accused, worked as agents/field workers for Financial Limited at Spandana Spurti Bank, Bhilai. The applicant was responsible for recovering money from the bank's customers as per the instructions of his superiors. However, the bank ofÏcials alleged that the applicant/accused misappropriated Rs. 3,01,036/-. Consequently, an FIR (No. 144/2024) under Sections 420 and 409/34 of the IPC was registered at Vaishali Nagar Police Station, District Durg, on 31.01.2025. The applicant was arrested, and the police took the matter for further investigation. The final report has not been filed yet. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the applicant had already paid Rs. 1,70,000/- to the bank as per the instructions of the ofÏcials. He further submits that the applicant's younger brother had visited him in jail but, unfortunately, met with an accident and passed away on 08.03.2025. The applicant needs to perform the last rites for his brother, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail in the present case. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application 3 of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has not been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that though the charge-sheet has not been submitted before the competent Court in the present case, moreover the fact that the applicant's younger brother had visited him in jail but, unfortunately, met with an accident and passed away on 08.03.2025. The applicant needs to perform the last rites for his brother, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 9. Let the Applicant – Ritesh Kumar Banjare, involved in Crime No. 144/2024 registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District – Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum 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. (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 4 cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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. 10. 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