1 2025:CGHC:24697 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4488 of 2025 Smt. Ranjana Manikuri W/o Pramil Das Manikpuri Aged About 41 Years R/o Villag Podi, Thana Sipat, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Thana Sipat, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Shishir Dixit, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Sangarsh Pandey, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/06/2025 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.154/2025 registered at Police Station Sipat, Distt.- Bilaspur [C.G.] for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of Indian Penal GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.06.19 10:58:56 +0530 2 Code. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on 19.03.2025 a complaint was lodged against the Ex Janpad Member Premal Das and his wife Ranjana Manikpuri (Present applicant) that in the year 2022-23 had taken loan in the name of complainant and other woman by making a promise that the expenditure would be incurred in village's development and when government would release the fund, the loan amount be repaid. None of woman has to repay the loan. Thereafter they had obtained Addhar Card, Ration card, PEN card and obtained loan from various banks. After completion of investigation Challan was submitted before the Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that the applicant was arrested on the basis of memorandum of co-accused. The applicant was neither member of janpad panchayat nor she is authorized to do any development work of panchayat. He would submit that there is no criminal antecedent against the applicant. He would further submit that the applicant had no connection in obtaining loan. It is the complainant who had taken loan and would have signed the document for obtaining loan. He would submit that the applicant is in jail since 20/03/2025, 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. He would further submit that the allegation against the applicant and her 3 husband who is main accused is that they had taken loan in the name of 57 women for the development purpose and the total loan amount of Rs.65 lakhs was taken by the applicant and her husband. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the nature of allegation against the applicant and her husband, that they had taken loan in the name of 57 women for the development purpose and total loan amount of Rs.65 lakhs was taken by the applicant and her husband, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant Smt. Ranjana Manikuri involved in Crime No.154/2025 registered at Police Station Sipat, Distt.- Bilaspur [C.G.] for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of Indian Penal Code., is rejected. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri