1 2025:CGHC:47771 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6681 of 2025 Lata Khunte W/o Shri Dileram Khunte Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Gangapurkhurd P.S. Gandhinagar, Tehsil - Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Kamleshwarpur, Mainpat, District - Surguja (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.09.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as she has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 38/2025, registered at Police Station : Kamleshwarpur, Mainpat, District - Surguja, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant dishonestly obtained a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- in cash from the RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 complainant by deceiving him with the false promise of securing a job. On the basis of the written report lodged by the complainant, Crime No. 38/2025 under Section 420 of the IPC was registered against the applicant at Kamleshwarpur Police Station. After completion of the investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet on 22.07.2025 for the said offence. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and has not committed any offence under Section 420 IPC. She merely looked after office work at Sarguja Mart Pvt. Ltd. in the absence of the director, Mr. Rajaram Bhagat, and had no role in taking or handling money from the complainant. The money was allegedly taken by Rajaram Bhagat and Jisu Tirkey, neither of whom has been made an accused, and the applicant never received or gained from the said amount. He also submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, she is in jail since 26.05.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, except for certain pending cases of a similar nature, in which she has already been granted bail by this Court and trial Court. Moreover, the applicant has been granted bail in MCRC No. 3115/2025, MCRC No. 3070/2025, and MCRC No. 3091/2025 involving similar allegations, and therefore, on the ground of parity, she is also entitled to bail in the present matter. 3 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He also submits that the applicant dishonestly obtained a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- in cash from the complainant by deceiving him with the false promise of securing a job, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that though the applicant dishonestly obtained a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- in cash from the complainant by deceiving him with the false promise of securing a job, but she is in jail since 26.05.2025, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion and further the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, except for certain pending cases of a similar nature, in which she has already been granted bail by this Court and trial Court, the applicant has been granted bail in MCRC No. 3115/2025, MCRC No. 3070/2025, and MCRC No. 3091/2025 involving similar allegations, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. 7. Let the applicant, Lata Khunte, involved in Crime No. 38/2025, registered at Police Station : Kamleshwarpur, Mainpat, District - Surguja, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, be released on bail on furnishing 4 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 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 charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the 5 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan