1 2025:CGHC:1558 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 23 of 2025 Pintu Sonekar S/o Shri Ramesh Sonekar, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Street No. 1, Near Ravidas Mandir, Pandharabodi, Nagpur, Maharashtra. (Particulars of the applicant is mentioned correctly) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station In-Charge Police Station Civil Lines, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.01.2025 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 977/2024 registered at Police Station – Civil Lines, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (In short, IPC). 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 13.10.2024 the complainant, namely, Smt. Ekta Sahu and other has given a written complaint to the PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.01.10 16:19:35 +0530 2 police authorities against the present applicant and other co-accused person namely Mayur Chandrakumar Meshram and Prashant Khobragade stating that they are resident of Bilaspur. It is alleged that a company under the name and style Taj Desire Vacations operated in Bilaspur from 2020 to 2024, its employees used to explain about the scheme informing that if any person takes membership with the company by paying a premium then they will be given vacation packages and plots. Thereafter, the complainant paid the company Rs. 3 Lakh to Rs. 4 Lakh and received receipt also. It is further stated in the complaint that some of the complainant went into vacation as promised but they reported poor arrangements, further whey they demanded plot the company gave excuses and eventually closed down the ofÏce. When the complainant demanded the refund of amount then they refused to refund the money stating that partners of the company has changed. Being aggrieved by the said action of the company the complaint was made before police authorities. That pursuant to the complaint made to concerned police station the FIR has been lodged by the police authorities bearing Crime No. 977/2024 against the present applicant and other co-accused persons. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the two cases were registered against the applicant and in one of the case which was registered against the applicant i.e. case Crime No. 363/2024 Police Station - City Kotwali, District - Bilaspur for offence under Section 420 of IPC, the applicant preferred an anticipatory bail in MCRCA No.1222/2024 which was rejected by this Court on 06.11.2024 against which the applicant preferred SLP before the Hon'ble Apex Court in which he has been granted interim bail and further the 3 co-accused, namely, Mayur Chandrakumar Meshram has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 02.12.2024 passed in MCRCA No. 1390/2024. The copy of the same annexed as Annexed A/4 of this bail application. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant, and from the perusal of the case diary it transpires that the the two cases were registered against the applicant and in one of the case which was registered against the applicant i.e. case Crime No. 363/2024 Police Station - City Kotwali, District - Bilaspur for offence under Section 420 of IPC, the applicant preferred an anticipatory bail in MCRCA No.1222/2024 which was rejected by this Court on 06.11.2024 against which the applicant preferred SLP before the Hon'ble Apex Court in which he has been granted interim bail and further the co-accused, namely, Mayur Chandrakumar Meshram has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 02.12.2024 passed in MCRCA No. 1390/2024, hence, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Pintu Sonekar on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting OfÏcer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- 4 (a) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade his from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The Applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d)The Applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicant shall not involved himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Preeti