1 2025:CGHC:35433 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5412 of 2025 1 - Smt. Vanshree Tukaram Chindrawar Wife Of Shri Tukaram Sakahari Chindrawar Aged About 50 Years Resident Of Tukaram More, Basti Chikhali, Chichwad 29 Police Station Chikhali, Pune (Maharastra) --- Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Of Police Station Chirmiri, District Manendragarh- Chirmiri- Bharatpur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Anil Gulati, Advocates For Respondent-State : Mr. Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate with Mr. Triveni Shankar Sahu, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 23/07/2025 1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as she has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 70/2016 registered at Police Station – Chirmiri, District Manendragarh – Chirmiri- Bharatpur (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 4 & 5 of Prize, Chits & Money BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: 2025.07.26 10:46:59 +0530 2 Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act and Section 10 of Prohibition of Depositors and Investors Act.. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that on 28.02.2016, a report was lodged by one Dharmendra, alleging that he was working as an electrician and came into contact with an agent of Samruddha Jeevan Multi Estate, Multipurpose Cooperative Society Limited, who assured him that any amount invested in the company would be doubleed within a short period. Relying on this assurance, he invested money in the said company. However, upon maturity of the investment, the matured amount was not returned to him. Based on the report, aforementioned crime was registered and applicant was arrested on 04.02.2025. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that police has made a case that applicant is also one of the director of the society, which is not correct. Along with the application, the counsel has placed on record the copy of list of directors of the company, in which the name of applicant is not appearing as director. He also contended that in one of the crime registered in Maharashtra, she was enlarged on bail vide order dated 13.03.2025 in Criminal Bail Application No.792 of 2025. Applicant is a lady. Charge-sheet in this case has already been filed. The other co- accused persons have been shown to be absconded and trial may take sometime, hence, applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and submits that there are specific allegation against applicant that she is also one of the director and she was working from the office at Pune. He also submits that applicant was arrested in one of the case registered in Maharashtra 3 and arrested in this crime after her production. He however, do not dispute the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that after completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against applicant and one Ramlinghan. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel for respective parties and taking into consideration the fact that charge-sheet in this case has been filed and applicant being lady is in jail since 04.02.2025, 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 she 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 her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails 4 to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, 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 her 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/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE Balram