1 2025:CGHC:18597 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3133 of 2025 Saurabh Sharma S/o Rajesh Kumar Sharma Aged About 29 Years R/o Om Society Sundar Nagar, Near Dhanshi Kirana Store, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Tikrapara, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24/04/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 63/2025 registered at Police Station Tikrapara, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a written report, alleging that the applicant enticed them to invest in AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 the share market with a promise of a 10% profit on the invested amount. On the basis of said assurance complainant invested approximately Rs.8,50,000/- through the applicant but didn't receive any profits. When they requested a refund, it was denied, leading to the filing of the FIR against the applicant and other co-accused persons. Thereafter, aforesaid offence has been registered against the applicant and subsequently, he was arrested. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that applicant and complainant were having cordial relationship, due to which, applicant had invested the said amount, however, the same did not give the desired return, therefore, an FIR has been filed giving it a colour of criminal nature, whereas, the entire transaction is civil in nature and there is no element of criminality attached. He also submits that there is no documentary proof of the alleged offence and there was no wrongful intent on the part of the applicant to commit the alleged offence. The applicant is in jail since 24.01.2025, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that though the applicant has no criminal antecedent, but he alongwith other co-accused persons 3 had committed fraud with complainant, they enticed the complainant to invest in the share market with a promise of a 10% profit on the invested amount and took Rs.8,50,000/- from him, but later on, applicant failed to obtain any profit and also refused to returned the principal amount, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 24.01.2025, the fact that though the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons are alleged to have committed fraud with the complainant, they enticed the complainant to invest in the share market with a promise of a 10% profit on the invested amount and took Rs.8,50,000/- from him, but later on, applicant failed to obtain any profit and also refused to returned the principal amount, but he has no criminal antecedents and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant-Saurabh Sharma, involved in Crime No. 63/2025 registered at Police Station Tikrapara, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 r/w Section 34 of the IPC, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (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. (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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil