1 2025:CGHC:10932 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 359 of 2025 Pramod Kumar S/o Jagarnath, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Navgaon P.S., Bindhiachal, District- Mirzapur (U.P.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Lundra District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. S.S.Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 05/03/2025 1 The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 143/2022, registered at Police Station – Lundra, District- Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 409 of Indian Penal Code. 2 The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, it appears prima facie that on the basis of the written complaint submitted by Rohit Kumar, PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI 2 Regional Manager of Prayatna Micro Finance Company Limited, a named FIR has been registered against the applicant on 19.10.2022 at Police Station Lundra, District – Ambikapur (Surguja), Chhattisgarh under Crime No. 143/2022 under Sections 409 of Indian Penal Code. The case is being investigated for the applicant embezzling Rs. 69,659/-, the money meant for the payment of loan given to rural women for employment in the said company and the money kept in the vault for giving loan, and the applicant is absconding without informing anyone. Later, the applicant was arrested from Naugaon, Mirzapur (U.P.). Hence, this offence. 3 It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the offence under Section 409 of IPC involves an alleged embezzlement of Rs. 69,659/-, which is an relatively small amount. He further submits that after the company winded up the business, the applicant returned back to his native place and was residing there. The applicant has no knowledge of any embezzlement and he has been made a escape goat by the owner of the company. He also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and the applicant is in jail since 17.12.2024 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4 On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has not been filed in the present case. He further submitted that the applicant/accused, who was working as a Branch Manager at the Lundra Branch of the said company, allegedly embezzled a total of Rs. 69,659, comprising loan repayment amounts from rural women and cash kept in the vault for 3 loan disbursement. Therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 5 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6 Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and the charge-sheet has not been filed and he is in jail since 17.12.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7 Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Pramod Kumar, involved in Crime No. 143/2022, registered at Police Station – Lundra, District- Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 409 of Indian Penal Code, 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 4 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 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti