Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 23548 (CHH)

DEVANAND SONWANI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/4048/2025 · 2025-05-21

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:22309 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4048 of 2025 1 - Devanand Sonwani S/o Rishi Kumar Sonwani Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Doma Ward No. 2, P.S. Mujgahan, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Balod, P.S. And District - Balod Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For State/Non-applicant : Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Dy. Advocate General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22.05.2025 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. 612/2024 registered at Police Station Balod, District Balod, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2) and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. (for short ‘BNS’). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Smt. Bhamin Kunjam has lodged a report in Police Station Balod, District Balod (C.G.) alleging therein that, the applicant and other accused persons 2 allegedly cheated rural women of Rs.36,13,000/- by forming groups in villages, encouraging them to take loans with false promises of agricultural investment and then keeping the money without repayment. They later formed a company named RDB FX and invested Rs.88 lakhs taken from the women and others into trading, which resulted in heavy losses, only Rs.8 lakhs has been returned. The main accused, namely; Kholbahara Nishad also invested Rs.2 crore 88 lakhs in platinum coins and the same company, which was lost due to a market crash. The fraud amount was allegedly invested in a company jointly owned by the applicant and the other accused persons. Based on these allegations, an FIR has been registered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the present applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned case. He would further submit that four cases are registered against one Kholbahara Nishad, who is the main accused for the similar offences by various complainants, out of which, in three cases, he has been granted bail by the learned trial Court. He further submitted that some of the amount stated to have been deposited in the account of applicant’s company, in which, he was working as an employee and his salary was Rs.20,000/-. Lastly he submitted that one of the co-accused namely; Shyama Bai has already been enlarged on bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 29.04.2025 passed in MCRC No.3273/2025, therefore, he prays that the present applicant is also entitled to grant regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. Further, he admits the 3 fact that one of the co-accused -Shyama Bai has granted regular bail, but on the ground that she is an illiterate lady and aged about 60 years, therefore, the same is not applicable in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the manner in which the offence has been committed and also considering the nature of the allegation that has been leveled against the applicant that he is said to have involved in cheating and a huge amount to the tune of crores has been siphoned off and also considering the fact that the co- accused -Shyama Bai has been granted regular bail who is 60 year old illiterate lady, I am not inclined to allow the present bail application. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Devanand Sonwani, involved in Crime No. 612/2024 registered at Police Station -Balod, District Balod (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, is rejected. 8. 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 Rukhsar RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2025.05.22 17:10:59 +0530