1 2025:CGHC:48105 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6201 of 2025 Shouryajeet Sahu S/o Yogesh Sahu Aged About 21 Years R/o Plot No. 3, Sadak No. 06, Ashish Nagar, Risali, Bhilai, Police Station Newai, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Newai, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 7332 of 2025 Khushbu Dhruv D/o Narendra Dhruv Aged About 21 Years R/o Plot No. 416/34, Road-09, Ashish Nagar, Risali, Bhilai, P.S. Newai (Wrongly As Nevai In The Covering Memo Of The Impugned Order), District Durg Chhattisgarh ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Newai, District Durg Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Applicant in MCRC No.6201 of 2025 : Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, Advocate. For Applicant in MCRC : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 No.7332 of 2025 For Respondent/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. For Objector : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 18/09/2025 1. Since the above-mentioned two bail applications arise out of same crime number, they are clubbed and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. These are the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 06/2025 registered at Police Station Newai, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 411 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the complaint of Narendra Dhruv, Police Station Nevai registered Crime No. 06/2025 for offences under Sections 420, 411, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleges that accused Shouryajeet Sahu and co-accused Khushbu Dhruv, acting together with other associates, misused documents belonging to the complainant, his wife Vimla Devi Dhruv, and his brother-in-law Ramakant to fraudulently obtain loans from various banks and private companies. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed. The allegations show a planned conspiracy to commit 3 cheating and misappropriation of funds by using forged or misused documents, in which Shauryajit Sahu is described as the main accused and Khushbu Dhruv as an active participant in the same fraudulent scheme. Hence, the bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants jointly submit that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the crime in question. They further submits that one of the identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Gomti Sahu has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.06.2025 in MCRC No.3853 of 2025. Applicant Shouryajeet Sahu is in jail since 06.04.2025 and applicant Khushbu Dhruv is in jail since 22.04.2025, the applicants have no criminal antecedents, charge- sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, they prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 5. Learned State Counsel opposes the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicants and submits that in the present case charge-sheet has been filed. 6. Learned counsel for the objector submits that the allegation against the applicants is that, in collusion with each other and other associates, they misused documents belonging to the complainant Narendra Dhruv, his wife Vimla Devi Dhruv, and his brother-in-law Ramakant to fraudulently obtain loans from various banks and private companies, applicant Shouryajeet Sahu is described as the main accused, while Khushbu Dhruv is alleged to be an active participant in the same fraud, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 4 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicants, Shouryajeet Sahu and Khushbu Dhruv since 06.04.2025 and 22.04.2025, respectively, the fact that though the allegation against the applicants that in collusion with each other and other associates, they misused documents belonging to the complainant Narendra Dhruv, his wife Vimla Devi Dhruv, and his brother-in-law Ramakant to fraudulently obtain loans from various banks and private companies, but considering the fact that one of the co- accused, namely, Gomti Sahu has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 27.06.2025 in MCRC No.3853 of 2025 and the case of present applicants is identical to that of the aforementioned co-accused, further the applicants have no criminal antecedents and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 9. Accordingly, the applications are allowed. 10. Let the Applicants - Shouryajeet Sahu and Khushbu Dhruv, involved in Crime No. 06/2025 registered at Police Station Newai, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 411 r/w Section 34 of the IPC, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following 5 conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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) 6 recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 11. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Rahul Dewangan