1 / 3 2025:CGHC:18754 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3183 of 2025 • Piyush Wadhera S/o Shri Ashok Wadhera Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward No. 14, Nehru Nagar, P.S. Kotwali, Tahsil And District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officers, P.S. City Kotwali, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Ravi Kumar Bodhani, Advocate (through V.C.) with Mr. Ankush Soni, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Rajeev Bharat, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 25/04/2025 1. Applicant has filed this second bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 53/2024 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B of IPC. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that a report was lodged by one Santosh Kumar alleging that the applicant on the false pretext of providing Government Job in the Police Department on the post of Constable has procured ₹ 3,25,000/- in the year 2018 and thereafter, he was not provided the job nor returned the money. During the course of investigation, the statement of the other persons were also recorded including Vinay Kumar and Bhola Ram Patel in which, SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY 2 / 3 they have also stated that the applicant has fradulently procured the amount on the pretext of providing government job and issued forged appointment letters to them also. The applicant was arrested on 26.01.2024. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that this second bail application is filed on the ground of delay in trial. Applicant is in jail since 26.01.2024 and thereby he has completed about one year and three months of pre trial detention. There are as many as 29 enlisted witnesses out of which till January 2025 only 05 witnesses have been examined before the trial court. He submits that he is also the counsel in the trial court and after January 2025 none of the witnesses have been examined. All the material witnesses including the complainant and witnesses who has alleged that the applicant has procured money from him on the pretext of providing them Government job have been examined. There is no likelihood of influencing the material witnesses, hence, applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and further submits that the first applicaqtion filed by applicant has been dismissed onmertis. He also contended that the witnesses in their statement recorded under Section 161 of CrPC have made categorical statement that they have been defrauded by the applicant and procured money from them as also issued forged and fabricated appointment order to the complainant and others, hence. He is not entitled for grant of bail. However, he does not dispute the submission of learned counsel for applicant that till January 2025 only 05 witnesses have been examined before the trial court. On putting query to learned State counsel, he submitted that there is no other criminal antecedent against applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 6. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission made by learned counsel for the parties, period of pre- 3 / 3 trial detention since 26.01.2024 and also considering the submission of State counsel that there is no other criminal antecedent against applicant, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant-Piyush Wadhera shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) 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. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) 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. (d) 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, 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/-Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE