1 2025:CGHC:37712 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5047 of 2025 • Anurag Choubey S/o Late Ramlal Choubey Aged About 26 Years R/o House No. 488, Ward No. 11, Kapdaah, Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) Presently R/o Teachers Colony, Bharat Mata Chowk, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Saraswati Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Amitesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 31/07/2025 1. This is 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. 119/2025 registered at Police Station Saraswati Nagar District Raipur (C.G.) under Section 316(4) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Ashok Bajoria submitted a written complaint to this effect that he is the treasurer of VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.08.04 10:58:51 +0530 2 Maruti Lifestyle Residential Welfare Society. For the maintenance of the said colony, maintenance fee is collected from the residents of the colony and a receipt is given. The said work was being done by accountant Prakash Kumar since December 2023, who left the job on 10 January 2025. In the month before leaving the job, in December 2024, it was told that the receipt book of society receipt bull no. 24 simple number 2301 to 2400 is not available from the office. While asking for the maintenance fee of the year 2024-25 from the residents of the colony, it was found that the maintenance fee of the lost receipt was collected in receipt no. 2301, 2307, 2311, 2312, 2314. the residents told Anurag Choubey to give it to them. Thus, the supervisor Anurag Choubey did not deposit the maintenance fee collected from the residents of the colony with the manager of the society, Kushagra Verma, but spent it himself and embezzled the said amount. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant was working as Supervisor in the Society and he has no authority to collect the maintenance charges, allegation levelled against the present applicant is baseless. Further the applicant has no criminal antecedent of the year 2009 and he is in jail since 29.05.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, she prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and also endorse the said submission that the applicant has 3 no criminal antecedent, but the looking to the conduct of the applicant, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 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 that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and applicant was working as Supervisor in the Society and he has no authority to collect the maintenance charges, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, he is in jail since 29.05.2025, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case 7. Let the Applicant – Anurag Choubey, involved in Crime No. 119/2025 registered at Police Station Saraswati Nagar District Raipur (C.G.) under Section 316(4) of BNS, be released on bail on their furnishing 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 during trial and in order to secure his presence, 4 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 vaishali