1 2025:CGHC:46357 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6848 of 2025 Smt. Madhumita Pal W/o Manedra Pal Aged About 38 Years Caste Gaderi, Occupation Shopkeeper R/o Near Shiv Mandir, Navapara Road, Mohalla Gandhinagar, P.S. Gandhinagar (Rural), Post And Tehsil - Ambikapur, District - Sarguja (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer- Gandhinagar, Ambikapur, District- Sarguja (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Tripathi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulabani, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.09.2025 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. 290/2025 registered at Police Station : Gandhinagar, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 3(5), 318(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Prosecution case in a nutshell is that on 16.05.2025, the complainant Sitara Manikpuri lodged a complaint at Police Station Gandhinagar ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.09.11 13:17:54 +0530 2 (Ambikapur), alleging that accused Madhumita Pal was running self- help groups in different wards. It was alleged that the accused had taken loans in the names of the members of such self-help groups, and from each bank she received about Rs. 40,000–45,000/- out of which she paid only Rs. 10,000/- to the respective members, while assuring them that she herself would take responsibility for repayment of the loan amounts. In this manner, the accused allegedly misappropriated about Rs. 15 lakhs from the banks and failed to pay the loan installments. The complainant further alleged that the present accused and co-accused Manendra Pal had assured repayment of the loan amount by selling his property, but they did not fulfill the said promise. Thus, both the accused, husband and wife Manendra Pal and Madhumita Pal, misappropriated the loan amount for their personal use. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant has no role to play in the aforesaid offence. The applicant merely runs the self-help group, through which she assists its members in obtaining loans from the bank to improve their earnings by supporting their businesses. He further submits that the complainant has levelled false accusations against the applicant, the true facts are that on 13.03.2025, the complainant, along with other members of the group and their husbands, came to the applicant’s house and raised allegations against her regarding non-payment of the loan amount. In response, the applicant assured them that she would address the issue. However, the complainant, being dissatisfied with her response, attempted to force the applicant and her husband to 3 sign certain papers before the Court. When they refused, the complainant and others threatened to file a false case against the applicant and her husband and further threatened to take forcible possession of their house. Out of fear, the applicant and her husband were compelled to accompany them to the District Court and sign the papers under coercion. He submits that the applicant had duly brought these facts to the notice of the Station House Officer, Gandhinagar, through her written complaint. He also submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and she is in jail since 02.06.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and also endorse the submission made by learned counsel, for the applicant that the present applicant has no criminal antecedent. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of offence and further the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant has been in jail since 02.06.2025 and the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 4 7. Let applicant, Smt. Madhumita Pal , involved in Crime No. 290/2025 registered at Police Station : Gandhinagar, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 3(5), 318(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount 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. 5 (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 her 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 Abhishek