1 2025:CGHC:13349 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 333 of 2025 Sanjay Jarika S/o Veersingh Jarika Aged About 50 Years R/o State Bank of India (Ex-Branch Manager), Rest House Road, Pendra Road, District- Gourella-Pendra-Marwahi C.G. (Wrongly Mentioned As District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Bodla, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 20.03.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 209/2024 registered at Police Station : Bodla, District Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. As per the prosecution's case, in brief, an FIR was registered on ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.03.22 10:37:43 +0530 2 26.09.2024, against Prateek Uikye, alleging that a self-withdrawal of Rs. 1,39,626/- was made from the account of Smt. Deepa Bai Ahirwar, who had passed away on 18.11.2022, on 18.04.2024, and a further sum of Rs. 1,46,400/- was withdrawn on 18.05.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He argues that there is no evidence whatsoever connecting the applicant to the crime in question. He further submits that, according to the internal inquiry conducted by the Bank, the allegations of embezzlement point to Prateek Uikye, as the applicant was still in his probation period and was in the process of learning procedures. Taking advantage of these circumstances, the main accused, Prateek Uikye, committed the offense. He further submits that the applicant has only one criminal antecedent of the similar nature which is also listed today for hearing before this Court, except these cases the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 17.12.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of offence and further the fact that the present applicant has only one criminal antecedent of the similar nature which is also listed today for hearing before this Court, except these cases the applicant has no criminal antecedents, also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant has been in jail since 17.12.2024, the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Sanjay Jarika, involved in Crime No. 209/2024 registered at Police Station : Bodla, District Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), be released on bail on his 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 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 4 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient 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 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 sufÏcient 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. OfÏce 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 Abhishek