1 2025:CGHC:46598 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6519 of 2025 Ram Prasad Raidas S/o Sukool Raidas, Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Dhangwan, Nawri Navapara P.S. Gaurela, Tehsil - Pendra Road, District - Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Pendra, District Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi,(C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Megha Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 11.09.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 12/2025 registered at Police Station - Pendra District – Gaurela - Pendra Marwahi (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 419 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The case case of the prosecution is that, the complainant Rahul VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.09.12 12:54:04 +0530 2 Dahriya had made a written complaint to its effect FLR was lodged dated 09/01/2025 stating that Inderlal S/o Charnu Oraon of his village told him that Ram Prasad Raidas is a Government Officer in Horticulture Department and he can supply bore machine, solar pump, sewing machine, barbed wire and other equipment at a lower price under the government's exemption, for which he was given immediately Rs.15,000/- for 1.5 HP motor pump. After that the appellant assured other people of the village also by saying that he would provide them with machinery of higher value on depositing less amount, falling into his trap many villagers gave him money. He also cheated some people of nearby village in the same way. After which he was arrested on 11.06.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. It is submitted that although only a single complaint was made, the police personnel have wrongly registered two more cases against him, thereby falsely implicating him in the incident. She further submits that though the applicant has two similar cases, the trial Court has already granted him bail in those matters. The applicant, being a farmer and the sole breadwinner of his family, has been in custody since 11.06.2025, and till date no charge sheet has been filed, which indicates that the trial will take considerable time to conclude. This period is also crucial for farming activities, thereby causing further hardship to his family in his absence. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, with no possibility of absconding or tampering with prosecution witnesses, and he is ready and willing to abide by any conditions imposed by this Hon’ble 3 Court. Hence, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. Therefore, she prays for grant of regular bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court in the present case, and that the applicant has two criminal antecedents, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the fact that the applicant has two previous antecedents, that he has already been granted bail by the trial Court, that the charge sheet has been filed, and that he has been in jail since 11.06.2025 with the conclusion of the trial likely to take some time, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. 7. Let the Applicant – Ram Prasad Raidas, involved in Crime No. 12/2025 registered at Police Station - Pendra District – Gaurela - Pendra Marwahi (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 419 & 420 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. 4 (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his 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 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. 8. 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 vaibhav