1 2025:CGHC:27405 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4801 of 2025 1 - Sanjay Sahu @ Chandrabhushan Sahu S/o Late Domar Sahu Aged About 33 Years, 2 - Harish Verma S/o Nilkanth Verma Aged About 29 Years (wrongly mentioned surname in order sheet Annexure A/1) Both are resident of Goutam Nagar, Kursipar Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Ganj, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants : Shri Jitendra Gupta, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24/06/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.06.25 17:08:44 +0530 2 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.120/2025 registered at Police Station Ganj, Raipur, District: Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 309 (4) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, the applicants and complainant are indulged in the business and during conversation of business transaction, the applicants have received blank cheque for account verification containing signature and seal of firm of complainant. Further when the business deal was not executed between them, the applicants threatened the complainant of withdrawing 2,00,000/- from his account and also threatened to assault him snatched Mobile and blank cheque from the possession of complainant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent person and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that no alleged offence has been made out against the applicants by any stretch of imagination as there was no such incident occurred and due to failure of business transaction, the alleged report has been lodged by the complainant. He would submit that charge sheet has been filed, applicants are in jail since 9/05/2025 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and she would submit that charge sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent court and there is one criminal antecedent against the applicant No.1 under the Gambling Act of the year 2017 and there is no criminal antecedent against the applicant No.2. 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 there is one criminal antecedent against the applicant No.1 under the Gambling Act of the year 2017 and there is no criminal antecedent against the applicant No.2, charge sheet has been filed, period of detention of the applicants since 9/05/2025 and trial is likely to some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant No.1 Sanjay Sahu @ Chandrabhushan Sahu and Applicant No.2 Harish Verma, involved in Crime No.120/2025 registered at Police Station Ganj, Raipur, District: Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 309 (4) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita 2023, be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such 5 default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them 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