1 (MCRC No. 4089 of 2025) 2025:CGHC:22392 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4089 of 2025 1 - Devanteen Verma W/o Late Shri Kanhu Verma Aged About 50 Years R/o House No. 10/316, Ward No. 16, Veer Shivaji Nagar, P.S.- Khamtarai, Raipur, Distt. -Raipur (C.G.) --- Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station, Mandir Hasaud, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) --- Non-applicant(s) (Cause title taken from the Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Pramod Shrivastava, Dy. GA Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.05.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 15 of 2025 registered at Police Station : Mandir Hasaud, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Digitally signed by ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Date: 2025.05.28 14:33:44 +0530 2 (MCRC No. 4089 of 2025) Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that one Smt. Praveen Agrawal filed a complaint alleging that an agreement was executed on 13.12.2024 to purchase a land situated at Mandir Hasaud which was in the name of Shri Pushpa Sarathi. On 20.12.2024, when the parties reached to registrar office and it was agreed that the sale deed was to be registered in two parts in the joint names of the complainant and Smt. Sangeeta Agrawal. The applicant (Smt. Devanteen Verma) posing as Rajaram Sarathi's wife signed as the seller, and a total of Rs.2.17 crores was paid via cheques in the name of Pushpa Sarthi @ Devanteen Verma/ the applicant. Later on 09.01.2025, it was discovered by the complainant that he has been defrauded by the applicant. It has been further alleged that the fraudulent transaction was allegedly arranged by Murli Gajwani and Vikram Singh Patel, who admitted the same. It was further alleged that Ruknuddin Khan and Satish Sinha (co-accused) also conspired in preparing forged documents. Based on the complaint, a case has been registered against the applicant and co-accused under Sections 3(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) under provisions of the BNS Act. Hence, the bail application. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that 3 (MCRC No. 4089 of 2025) Vikram Singh Patel and Murli Gajwani are the main accused persons who had done the transaction and the accused Vikram Singh Patel has been granted benefit of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 19.03.2025 passed in MCRCA No.384 of 2025. He would further submit that the other co-accused namely, Satish Sinha who has been alleged to take the present applicant for personation has also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 23.04.2025 passed in MCRC No. 3083/2025. Therefore, on the ground of parity, the applicant herein may also be granted bail. It is further submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the present applicant is an illiterate lady who was under influence of other co-accused persons and has only acted on their behest and was completely unaware of the facts and intentions of the co-accused persons. That, there is no criminal antecedents against the applicant and she is 50 years old lady and is in jail since 11.01.2025 and the conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in this matter and, therefore, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail at this juncture. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the 4 (MCRC No. 4089 of 2025) case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence and also considering the fact that the other co-accused person namely, Vikram Singh Patel has been granted benefit of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 19.03.2025 passed in MCRCA No.384 of 2025 and the another co-accused namely, Satish Sinha has also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 23.04.2025 passed in MCRC No. 3083/2025 and the present applicant is in jail since 11.01.2025 and the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, I am of the opinion that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Let applicant, Devanteen Verma involved in Crime No.15 of 2025 registered at Police Station : Mandir Hasaud, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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. 5 (MCRC No. 4089 of 2025) (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Samhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Samhita. (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 sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the concerned trial Court forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice @d!t!