1 2025:CGHC:12314 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 607 of 2025 Pawan Khatri S/o Mohanlal Khatri Aged About 30 Years R/o Songanga Colony, Sarkanda, Bilaspur, Police Station - Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dhirendra Mishra, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.03.2025 1. This is the Fourth 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. 25/2024 registered at Police Station – Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The first and second bail application of the present applicant being ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.03.12 19:31:42 +0530 2 MCRC No. 2888 of 2024 and 4702 of 2024 were rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 06.05.2024 and 19.07.2024 on merits and the third bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 6482 of 2024 was dismissed as withdrawn by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 18.09.2024 with the liberty to file repeat the prayer at appropriate stage. 3. Prosecution story in brief is that on 03.01.2024, Anjani Mishra filed a written report at Police Station Sarkanda, Bilaspur (C.G.), stating that her mother-in-law, Shanti Mishra, owns a Swift Dzire car with registration number CG10BF4115. The vehicle was rented to Pawan Khatri by Anjani's husband, Sanjeev Mishra. However, Pawan Khatri sold the vehicle to Akash Mishra using fake documents. Through these fake documents, Rs. 3 lakhs were deposited into Shanti Mishra's bank account, and the same amount was withdrawn, committing fraud. It was later stated that on 29.07.2023, Sanjeev Mishra executed a rent agreement with Pawan Khatri, allowing him to drive the vehicle on rent. This agreement was made due to Sanjeev's kidney-related illness, which incurred expenses of Rs. 50,000/- per month. However, Pawan Khatri sold the vehicle to another person. The RTO confirmed that the vehicle was sold to Akash Mishra. It is alleged that fake signatures of Shanti Mishra were used in the sale deed, and Akash Mishra deposited Rs. 3 lakhs in exchange for the vehicle, worth Rs. 8 lakhs 50 thousand, without permission. Pawan Khatri claimed that the money was sent to Shanti Mishra's account by mistake, and Rs. 26 thousand was deducted as rental amount and returned. Shanti 3 Mishra returned Rs. 2,74,000/- through a cheque. Later, Anjani Mishra filed an FIR (Crime No. 25/2024) against the applicant and Akash Mishra for offenses under Sections 420, 406, and 34 of the IPC. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the applicant under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, and 34 of the IPC. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the fourth bail application on behalf of the applicant. He submits that there are 03 cases are registered against the applicant, in 01 case he has already been released on personal bond and 02 cases are listed today for hearing before this Court including the present case. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 23.02.2024 in the present case. It is stated that thrice the bail application of the present applicant was rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and as per the status of the trial only 01 prosecution witness has been examined till date, conclusion of the trail may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the fact that thrice the bail application of the present applicant was rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the applicant is in jail since 23.02.2024, as per the status of the trial, till 4 date only 01 prosecution witness has been examined, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicant – Pawan Khatri, involved in Crime No. 25/2024 registered at Police Station – Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on his 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. (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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 his, in 5 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 sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against his in accordance with law. 9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of further six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 10. OfÏce 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 Abhishek