1 / 4 2025:CGHC:30030 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5133 of 2025 • Nirajan Saxena S/o Ashok Saxena Aged About 50 Years R/o House No. B-4, Near Gangotri Dhaba Moderna House Building Society, Barkhedi Kala, Police Station- Barkhedi Kala, Bhopal (MP) (In Jail) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kota, District- Bilaspur C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Priya Kaiwart, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Sangeet Kushwaha, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. K.P. Gupta, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 03/07/2025 1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 27/2018 registered at Police Station – Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 420, 409, 34 of the IPC and Section 4, 5, 6 of the Price Chit Fund and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that complainant Ratiram Yadav lodged written report to the concerned police station stating that he along with 73 other investors and Agent deposited amount of Rs.50 crores with the Nirmal Infra- PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 4 home Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (for short NICL) on the assurance that NICL will return double the amount in 6 years. However, when they approached to Branch Office after maturity date, amount was not returned and office was closed. Based on the report, aforementioned crime was registered and during course of investigation, police arrested the applicant mentioning him to be one of the Director of the Company. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has not committed any offence, he has been falsely implicated in the crime. She contended that the applicant is in jail since 04.12.2021 and thereby he has completed about more than three and a half year of pre-trial detention. She stated that the identical placed co-accused persons have already enlarged on bail by this court in MCRC No. 1777/2024 vide order dated 19.03.2024, MCRC No. 9020/2024 vide order dated 06.01.2025, MCRC No. 2770/2025, vide order dated 08.04.2025, and MCRC No. 3715/2025 vide order dated 29.05.2025. She also contended that several complaints have been lodged against accused and co- accused persons based on which different crime numbers have been registered in different police stations. As per the order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court now they are to be tried by one court. She also submits that in one of the crime ie., Crime No. 146/2017 applicant has already been enlarged on bail in MCRC No. 8649/2023 vide order dated 13.12.2023. Hence, this application may also be allowed. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and further submits that applicant is one of the Directors of the Company and there are specific allegation against him in case diary and hence he is not entitled for grant of bail. However, he does not dispute the submission of learned counsel for applicant with respect to other facts argued by counsel for applicant of release of co-accused on bail as also of present applicant in one of the crime. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 3 / 4 6. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission made by learned counsel for the respective parties, period of pre-trial detention of applicant since 04.12.2021, investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been filed, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) 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. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) 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. (d) 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. 4 / 4 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE