1 2025:CGHC:15887 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2695 of 2025 Mathura Prasad Banjare S/o Ghasiram Banjare Aged About 50 Years R/o Village - Kapua, P.S.- Sargaon, Distt. - Mungeli (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Bhatapara (City), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 04.04.2025 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. 388/2020 registered at Police Station Bhatapara City, District – Balodabazar, Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.04.05 18:38:08 +0530 2 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471,419 and 34 the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. That, as per prosecution story in brief, that dated 2.10.2020 complainant namely Satish Agarwal lodged a written complaint stating that he is the owner of Kushal Tractors who sells Swaraj and from his showroom 2 pieces of Swaraj tractor 735, and piece of trolly and 2 pieces of wheels and one of Reversible plough total costing of Rs 12,30,000 have sold by the present applicant and one Bhago Bai Sonwani by preparing forged documents for loan offence under section 420,467,468,471,419,34 of IPC was registered against the present applicant. Hence the present bail application on the following grounds:- 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the entire case of the prosecution made against the present applicant is false baseless, and fabricated as the same is based on incorrect facts. He further submits that one co-accused namely Amrica Barman has already been granted bail by the learned trial Court. He further submits the present applicant is in jail since 28.01.2025, 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 - 3 sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. He submits that the present applicant along with other co-accused, namely, Amrica Barman are allegedly involved in a fraud of Rs. 12,30,000/- therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has no previous antecedents and one co-accused namely Amrica Barman and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed and he has been in jail since 28.01.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Let the Applicant – Mathura Prasad Banjare, involved in Crime No.388/2020 registered at Police Station Bhatapara City, District – Balodabazar, Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471,419 and 34 the Indian Penal Code (IPC)., be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two local 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 4 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 sufficient 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 sufficient cause, 5 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. 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 vaibhav