1 2025:CGHC:17676 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2946 of 2025 Pawan Kumar Dinde S/o Punlal Dinde Aged About 34 Years R/o Quarter No. 259/a, Chhota Ravana Maidan, Shiv Mandir, Risali, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station - Newai, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Deputy A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.04.2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. 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. 186/2024, registered at Police Station Newai, District - Durg (CG) for the offence punishable under AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Sections 420, 467, 468, 34, 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 3. The prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant, namely, Suyash Patel lodged a report before the Police Station Newai, that since past 2-3 years he was searching for a job, the present applicant and the complainant are neighbors and the present applicant introduced the complainant to the other accused, namely, Sunil Patel and assured of getting him a government job. In pursuance of the said promise the present applicant and the co accused Sunil Patel took Rs.1,00,000/- from the complainant on 13/05/2023 via Phone Pay to the account of Sunil and thereafter on various dated took almost Rs.20,00,000/- from the complainant by alluring of getting a job in the Government Department. Therefore, offence under sections 420, 467, 468, 34, 201 of the IPC was registered against the present applicant. Hence, the bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case, there was a monetary transaction between the co-accused, Sunil Patel and complainant, Suyash Patel and when the co-accused, Sunil Patel failed to return the money, he was implicated in the case. He further submits that applicant was merely a guarantor of the said transaction amount, which was done between the co-accused and complainant and it is evident from the agreement that the co- accused took the money from the complainant for some personal 3 purpose and there is absolutely no role of the present applicant in the case, copy of agreement is annexed as Annexure A/2. The applicant is in jail since 15.06.2024 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. 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 another co-accused had taken total Rs.20,00,000/- from the complainant for providing job in Government Department and later on refused to return the money, so far as co-accused is concerned, he is still absconding, therefore, applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Perusal of the case diary goes to show that the applicant alongwith another co-accused, Sunil Patel are alleged to have taken a total Rs.20,00,000/- from the complainant by alluring of getting a job in the Government Department and later on refused to return the money, so far as co-accused, Sunil Patel is concerned, he is still absconding, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it does not seem appropriate to grant bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant - Pawan Kumar 4 Dinde, involved in Crime No. 186/2024, registered at Police Station Newai, District - Durg (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 34, 201 of the IPC, is rejected. 9. However, it will be open for the prosecuting agency to initiate prosecution against the complainant of the present case also who claims to have been cheated by the applicant herein, as the conduct of the complainant amounts to give bribe for obtaining employment through illegal mode. 10. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 11. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil