1 2025:CGHC:43992 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6361 of 2025 Saniya Prasanna Shah D/o Prasanna Shah Aged About 28 Years R/o A- 12/902, Nivara, CHC-LBS Marg, Opposite Chheda Petrol Pump, P.S. Mulund West Mumbai (Maharashtra) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Kotwali, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Akash Chandrakar, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Jitendra Shrivastava, GA. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29/08/2025 1. This is 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.33/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 317(4), 319, 112, 61 of B.N.S. 2023 and Section 66C, 66D of I.T. Act. GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.08.30 14:56:13 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Rupesh Kumar Sahu has submitted a written report at the police station stating that he has a customer named Ashutosh Sharma, who informed him in December 2024 that his (Rupesh's) bank account had been frozen. Therefore, he requested Ashutosh Sharma to receive money in his account instead. Rupesh Sahu used to receive the money in his account and hand it over (to Ashutosh) after deducting a commission. At the behest of Ashutosh Sharma, Rupesh received money in his Bank of Baroda account on 6-7 occasions and handed it over to Ashutosh Sharma. On 21.12.2024, Ashutosh Sharma informed the applicant that funds would be transferred into his (the applicant's) bank account. A total of Rs.90,000/- was received and was immediately transferred. However, two or three days later, Rupesh Sahu's bank account was freezed. Upon inquiry with the bank, it was revealed that the account had been frozen by the Cyber Crime department. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that the applicant is an educated and divorcee woman, who had been living abroad away from her elderly parents and her 3-year-old innocent son, Kabir Verma, for the past 5 months, in order to provide proper maintenance for her child, she had gone to Cambodia to work as a translator, however, due to threats to her life there, with the help of her father's friend, Ranjeet Nair, she voluntarily returned to India via Vietnam on 01/05/2025. He would submit that there is no evidence to suggest the involvement of the present applicant in the crime in any 3 manner, because the present applicant has never been involved in any such activity or incident as alleged and FIR was registered against the co-accused persons, not against the present applicant. He would submit that co-accused Shrenik Sanghvi has been granted bail by this court in MCRC No.4520/2025 on 31/07/2025 and also co-accused person Rohit Birwani has also been granted bail by this court in MCRC No.3795/2025 on 13/05/2025. He would submit that the charge sheet has been filed in this case, applicant is in jail since 01/05/2025 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and he would submit that charge sheet has been filed in this case before the competent court. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegation levelled against the applicant, considering the fact that co-accused person namely Shrenik Sanghvi has been granted bail by this court in MCRC No.4520/2025 on 31/07/2025 and also co-accused person namely Rohit Birwani has also been granted bail by this court in MCRC No.3795/2025 on 13/05/2025, period of detention of the applicant since 01/05/2025, charge sheet has been filed, applicant being a lady and also considering the fact that trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 4 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the Applicant- Saniya Prasanna Shah, involved in Crime No.33/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 317(4), 319, 112, 61 of B.N.S. 2023 and Section 66C, 66D of I.T. Act, be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond with two local 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 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) 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 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. (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 5 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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri