1 2025:CGHC:44784 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6567 of 2025 1 - Avinash Singh Thakur S/o Ramsingh Thakur, Aged About 43 Years R/o Shukrwari Bazaar Near Navin School, Gudhiyari, Police Station- Gudhiyari, Tahsil And District Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Gudhiyari, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Vikrant Pillay, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Deputy Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 02/09/2025 1. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn on 7.2.2025 in MCRC No. 241 of 2025. The applicant has preferred this second bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail pertaining to Crime No.303/2023 registered at Police Station Gudhiyari, District Raipur (C.G.), for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 420 NIRMALA RAO 2 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The charge-sheet has been filed. However, a single witness has not been examined yet. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant was working as a Computer Operator in Chhattisgarh State Electricity Distribution Company Limited. In October 2021, the complainant, Avinash Gardey met the applicant. The applicant allegedly obtained a sum of Rs.13,18,021/- through bank transactions and Rs.5,00,000/- in cash in different installments, assuring the complainant that he would secure a government job (Assistant Engineer) for the complainant’s younger brother. The complainant lodged an FIR on 14.7.2023. The police registered the offence registered against the present applicant and his wife, Garima Singh Thakur as Rs.13,18,021/- was deposited into the bank account of wife of the applicant. The wife of the applicant has already been enlarged on bail by the learned trial Court. The charge- sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 28.6.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the allegation concerns Rs.5,00,000/- in cash. He would contend that the applicant has refunded Rs.4,10,000/- on different dates, with documentary evidence placed on record. He would contend that the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 28.6.2024, and a single witness has not been examined. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. He would also contend that the co-accused has already been granted bail by the learned trial Court. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the applicant. She would submit that the present applicant is the main accused, and the amount was transferred by the complainant to the bank account of Garima Singh 3 Thakur on his instance. She would contend that the applicant fraudulently obtained around Rs.18 lakhs from the complainant on the assurance of providing a government job. She would submit that the application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the case diary and material available on record. 6. According to the contents of the FIR, the applicant fraudulently obtained around Rs.18 lakhs on different dates from the complainant. The FIR would further reveal that Rs.13,18,021/- was deposited in installments into the bank account of Garima Singh Thakur, while the applicant is alleged to have received Rs.5,00,000/- in cash. The applicant has placed on record a bank transaction dated 2.12.2024, which shows that Rs.4,10,000/- was refunded. Further, the applicant has been in custody since 28.4.2024, the charge-sheet has been filed, and no witness has not been examined so far. Therefore, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (i) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such fact to the Court; (ii) He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial; 4 (iii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till the disposal of the trial; and, (iv) He shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature in future. 8. The observation made in the course of this order is only for considering the case of the applicant on the application for the grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by any observation made in the course of this order. 9. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi