1 2025:CGHC:30312 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3841 of 2025 Manoj Banjare S/o Shri Sahukar Banjare Aged About 28 Years R/o Ward No. 08, Mini Basti, Jarhabhata, Police Station Civil Lines. District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Sakib Ahmed, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03/07/2025 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.496/2025 registered at Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.07.05 16:06:45 +0530 2 Sections 308(5), 331, 3(5) of BNSS and section 3, 4 of Debt Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 31.03.2025 the complainant Dr. Sanjay Banjare lodged the report alleging that he borrowed loan of Rs. 16,00,000/- from the co-accused Ashish Tandan through bank account, aforesaid loan was paid, however, the Ashish Tandan demanded Rs. 27,00,000/- and forcefully taken signed in sale agreement in respect of the house situated at Mathpurena, Raipur. It is alleged against the present applicant that on 31.03.2025 the accused Ashish Tandan along with present applicant threatened the complainant and demanded of Rs. 27,00,000/-. Thereby offence has been committed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that if the entire allegation taken as it is then it is admitted that the complainant obtained money of Rs. 16,00,000/- from co-accused Ashish Tandan, the complainant executed sale agreement pertaining to the house situated at Mathpurena, Raipur with co-accused Ashish Tandan. He would submit that the accused never filed any application for cancellation of the sale agreement before any competent court. He would submit that there are financial transaction between the complainant and Ashish Tandan. He would submit that co-accused Jitendra Banjara has already been granted anticipatory bail by this court in MCRCA No.588/2025 on 28.04.2025 and co-accused Suraj Sonwani has also been granted regular bail by this court in MCRC 3 No.3384/2025 on 01.05.2025. He would submit that the applicant has one criminal antecedent of the year 2019 in which he has been acquitted and the applicant is in jail since 01/04/2025, charge sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application. He would submit that charge sheet has been filed in this case and the applicant has one criminal antecedent which he has explained in para 4a of the bail application. 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, considering the fact that co-accused Jitendra Banjara has already been granted anticipatory bail by this court in MCRCA No.588/2025 on 28.04.2025 and co-accused Suraj Sonwani has also been granted regular bail by this court in MCRC No.3384/2025 on 01.05.2025, period of detention of the applicant since 01/04/2025, charge sheet has been filed and trial is likely to some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the Applicant-Manoj Banjare, involved in Crime No.496/2025 registered at Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 308(5), 331, 3(5) of BNSS 4 and section 3, 4 of Debt Act, 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:- (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 sufficient 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 5 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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri