1 2025:CGHC:22020 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3802 of 2025 1 - Pankaj Bajoriya S/o Late Savarmal Bajoriya Aged About 42 Years R/o Flant No. 403, 4th Floor Amba Tower Face 2 Vinoba Nagar Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Tarbahar Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Aman Pandey, Advocate through Video Conferencing and Mr. Rohishek Verma, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Addl. Adv. General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13/05/2025 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of the applicant for grant of regular bail to him. Applicant is in custody in connection with Complaint Case No.836/2017 registered at Police Station Tarbahar, Bilaspur(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 138 the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. NISHA DUBEY Digitally signed by NISHA DUBEY 2 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that a complaint case was registered against the applicant/accused before the trial Court under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, which is pending before the trial Court. During pendency of the case applicant/accused had gone out of the city for some business work, so he could not appear before the trial Court on the dates fixed for his appearance, due to which a permanent arrest warrant was issued by the Court against the applicant dated 24.11.2022. After that on 7.4.2025 applicant was arrested by the Tarbahar Police in connection with Complaint Case No.836 of 2017 pending before the JMFC Bilaspur for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that present proceedings have been initiated against the applicant on the basis of complaint lodged by the complainant in the year 2017. Bail application of the applicant has been rejected by the trial Court on the ground that despite issuance of summons did not appear before the trial Court, therefore a permanent arrest warrant was issued against him. Hence the possibility of absconsion of accused cannot be denied. He submits that due to miscommunication coupled with fact that applicant had gone out of station in connection with his work, therefore he could not able to appear before the trail Court He submits that offence with which applicant is bailable. He next submitted that complainant of the case has also died during the pendency of the present case. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the bail application of applicant-Pankaj Bajoriya, involved in Complaint Case 3 No.836 of 2017, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act at Police Station – Tarbahar, Bilaspur (C.G.), is rejected by the trial Court recording that applicant was arrested from another State i.e. Odhisha, after lapse of sufficient time from the date of issuance of permanent arrest warrant, therefore, possibility that he will again abscond cannot be ruled out, I am not inclined to allow this application. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected, keeping it open to the trial Court to conclude the trial expeditiously. 7. Office 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 Nisha