1 2025:CGHC:17483 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2938 of 2025 Stuti Juliyas W/o Anish Juliyas Aged About 42 Years R/o Guru Bihar Quarter No. 02, Sarkanda, Thana Sarkanda, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate. For Non-Applicants : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/04/2025 1. Proceedings of this case have been taken through video conferencing. 2. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 163/2025 registered at Police Station Kharsiya, District : Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC (under Section 318(4) of BNS). 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on the date of incident i.e. 09.12.2022, co-accused / Vinod Das Mahant offered the wife of the KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 complainant to get her a job at CIMS hospital, Bilaspur. Thereafter, the co-accused introduced the complainant and his wife to the present applicant / accused who pretended to be the Doctor at CIMS, Hospital and further the applicant and co-accused took Rs. 1,50,000/- from the complainant and assured them to get her job at CIMS hospital. But no job was given to the complainant. Thereafter the complainant lodged the FIR No 163/2025 under Section 420 of IPC (318(4) of BNS) at police station Kharsiya, District Raigarh, C.G and subsequently arrested the applicant on 21.03.2025 and the police took the matter for further investigation. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the incident took place in the year 2022 and thereafter the FIR was lodged on 20.03.2025. Therefore, the applicant has been falsely and maliciously implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant is a lady aged about 42 years and having two young school going children and mother of about 70 years old suffering illness. The applicant takes care of her children and her old mother. Being in jail will cause her and her family mental and physical stress and the applicant is in jail since 21.03.2025 and in the present case charge-sheet has not been filed yet and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that from perusal of the case diary, it appears that the the applicant 3 along with co-accused promised to help complainant’s wife, providing a job at SIMS Hospital in Bilaspur. On 05.12. 2022, co- accused Vinod Das Mahant took them to Bilaspur in his car and introduced them to his partner, Stuti Julius, claiming she was a doctor at CIMS. They allegedly agreed on a deal for ₹5 lakh. Since they didn't bring the money, Stuti Julius dropped them off at their home in Kharsia in her car and collected ₹1 lakh there. She also gave them a stamped document. However, when the job didn't materialize, the complainant visited her home for her money back, only to find she was in Bilaspur Central Jail for similar cases. After her release, applicant-Stuti Julius called them to Dabhara on November 7, 2023, and assured them of getting the job done, getting a notarized document. Later, she took ₹50,000/-, claiming it was for issuing a joining letter. The investigation into the complainant's report found evidence of the crime. It was discovered that the accused, Stuti Julius/applicant and co-accused/Vinod Das Mahant, had cheated not only the complainant but also others by promising them jobs. Hence, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 21.03.2025 and also considering the fact that the applicant is a lady aged about 42 years and having two children and mother aged about 70 years old, who is suffering from illness and further there is 4 huge delay of about 03 years in lodging the FIR for which no explanation has been offered in this regard moreover, the applicant has one criminal antecedent of similar nature and in the present case, charge-sheet has not been submitted yet thus, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 8. Let the Applicant- Stuti Juliyas, involved in Crime No. 163/2025 registered at Police Station Kharsiya, District : Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC (under Section 318(4) of BNS), be released on bail on her furnishing a 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 she 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such 5 proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, 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 her in accordance with law. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal