1 2025:CGHC:19649 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3301 of 2025 Indrakumar Sahu Son Of Jaggu Sahu Aged About 27 Years Resident of Nawagaonkala, Tipani, District Bemetara (C.G.), At Present Resident of Village Near Bramhadev Mandir, Badhai Para, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police of Police Station Vidhan Sabha, Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anil Kumar Gulati, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 30.04.2025 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. 49/2025 registered at Police Station Vidhan Sabha, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. As per the brief facts of the prosecution case, the complainant, Atul Kumar Agrawal, who runs Ganesh Transport, Punjab Oil Mill, came ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.05.01 12:56:17 +0530 2 into contact through social media via Telegram and WhatsApp with Anjali Bansal's mobile number. He was informed about a share trading website and, after providing his Aadhaar card and PAN card, a login ID was prepared. On different dates, the complainant invested a total amount of Rs. 19,02,500/- and received Rs. 69,720/- out of the invested amount. It is alleged by the complainant that he invested the amount in various bank accounts and was cheated in the process of investing in the share market. It is also alleged that he was asked to pay more money, claiming that his account was blocked. Based on the report lodged by the complainant, the police at Police Station Vidhan Sabha registered a crime for the offense under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the IPC against unknown persons. Subsequently, the matter was investigated, and the present applicant, along with other co-accused persons, was arrested for the alleged offense. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the other co-accused person, namely, Vijay Singh Meena and Abhay Advani have already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 2961 of 2025 and 3023 of 2025 vide orders dated 17.04.2025 and 24.04.2025. Therefore, he submits that the present applicant is also entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case 3 diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the co-accused person, namely, Vijay Singh Meena and Abhay Advani have already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 2961 of 2025 and 3023 of 2025 vide orders dated 17.04.2025 and 24.04.2025, also considering the fact that the charge - sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and he has been in jail since 24.01.2025 and the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Applicant – Indrakumar Sahu, involved in Crime No. 49/2025 registered at Police Station Vidhan Sabha, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on his furnishing 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 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 4 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek