1 2025:CGHC:19392 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2674 of 2025 Navneet Kumar Pandey S/o Shri Kameshwar Pandey Aged About 52 Years R/o Shivam Garden Phase-1, Flat No. 02(D), Kilburn Colony, Hinu, Police Station Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Adv. General. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.04.2025 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. 519/2024 registered at Police Station : Gandhinagar, District Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Prize, Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Ke Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2005. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.04.30 11:16:46 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution's case, on 04.09.2024, the complainant, Devraj Yadav, lodged a written report before the Gandhinagar Police Station, alleging that the Director of Welfare Building and Estate Private Limited Company, Namnakala (Ambikapur) Branch, Distt. Surguja (C.G.), namely B. Sandhyawali, the Managing Director of the said company, namely Mala Vijay Prasad, the Regional Manager of the said company, namely Shashi Bhushan Chourasiya, and other accused persons enticed customers by promising to double their investment and pay higher interest. However, after receiving the amount from investors, the accused persons failed to return the invested amount and committed a breach of trust. Based on the complaint lodged by the complainant, the police registered a crime against the present applicant and six other accused persons, arrested the present applicant, and after completing the investigation, filed a charge sheet before the competent Court on 17.03.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that according to the written complaint, the allegations are specifically against the Director of Welfare Building and Estate Private Limited Company, Branch Namnakala (Ambikapur), Distt. Surguja (C.G.), namely B. Sandhyawali, the Managing Director, namely Mala Vijay Prasad, and the Regional Manager, namely Shashi Bhushan Chourasiya. Therefore, based on the averments in the written complaint, there is no role attributed to the present applicant in the present case, and he appears to have been falsely 3 implicated. He further submits that the complaint does not contain any allegations against the present applicant regarding his involvement as a promoter, partner, investor, manager, or employee responsible for the conduct of the financial establishment, management, business, or any activity involved in the above case. Moreover, the present applicant is not an employee of the Welfare Building and Estate Private Limited Company, Branch Namnakala, Ambikapur, and therefore, there is no direct or indirect involvement of the present applicant in the present case. He also submits that the present applicant has 01 criminal antecedent except the present case which is also listed before the Hon’ble Court for hearing, the applicant is in jail since 29.01.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the 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 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 4 the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant has been in jail since 29.01.2025 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. 7. Let applicant, Navneet Kumar Pandey, involved in Crime No. 519/2024 registered at Police Station : Gandhinagar, District Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Prize, Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Ke Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2005, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local 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. (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. 5 (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