1 2025:CGHC:35717 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5769 of 2025 Shrikant Tenneti S/o T. Kameshwar Rao, Aged About 42 Years R/o House Of Mayur Ramchuriya, Housing Board Colony, Hatkeshwar, Tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Kurud, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rajesh Jain, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Dr. Saurabh K. Pande, Deputy A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.07.2025 1. This is the Second Bail Application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 237/2024 registered at Police Station – Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (In short, IPC). 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 7087/2024 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 08.11.2024 on merits with liberty to proceed and conclude the trial RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 expeditiously. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the incident took place between 25.08.2023 and 05.08.2024. On 08.05.2024, complainant Piyush Rathour, Branch Manager of HDFC Bank, Kurud, lodged a written complaint at the police station alleging that the former Branch Manager, Shrikant Teneti, along with Tejendra Sahu, had committed criminal breach of trust by withdrawing amounts from the accounts of various account holders and transferring the same to their own accounts or those of their family members. It was further alleged that, by doing so, they committed fraud with the bank and misappropriated a total amount of ₹1,84,04,151/-. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merit with a direction to conclude the trial expeditiously and the applicant is in jail since 26.05.2024 and so far as the status of the trial is concerned, on 08.10.2024 charges were framed and after framing of charge, no prosecution witnesses have been examined in the case. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that this is the second bail application 3 and the earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits with a direction to conclude the trial expeditiously and so far as the status of the trial is concerned, on 08.10.2024 charges were framed and after framing of charge, no prosecution witnesses have been examined till date further the applicant is in jail since 26.05.2024, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicant – Shrikant Tenneti, involved in Crime No. 237/2024 registered at Police Station – Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on 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 her 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 4 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 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. 9. 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 Rahul Dewangan