2025:CGHC:7368 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1314 of 2024 Order reserved on 23.01.2025 Order delivered on 10.02.2025 Ashish Tiwari S/o Shri Krishna Kumar Tiwari Aged About 45 Years R/o House No. 352, Phase -3, Kabir Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh --- APPLICANT Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Sirgitti, District Bilaspur (C.G.) --- RESPONDENT MCRCA No. 1322 of 2024 Aakriti Tiwari (Aakriti Badgaiya) Wd/o Late. Shri Sanjaydhar Badgaiya Aged About 50 Years R/o House No. 16, Ward No. 68, Raipur Chowk, Agrasen Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- APPLICANT Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Sirgitti, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2025.02.10 18:09:19 +0530 --- RESPONDENT -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellants : Mr. Sunil Otwani with Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocates For Respondent/State : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Pandey, Dy. AG -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas CAV Order 1. Since both the bail applications for grant of anticipatory bail arise out of same Crime number, they are heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. This is the second anticipatory bail application of applicant Ashish Tiwari and third bail application of applicant Aakriti Tiwari under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, who have apprehension of being arrested in connection with Crime No. 59/2018, registered at Police Station– Sirgitti, Bilaspur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 420/34 of the IPC, 4,5,6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act and 10 of CG Protection of Depositors Act. First bail application of applicant Akriti Tiwari was dismissed as withdrawn on 28.08.2023 in MCRCA No. 1042 of 2023, Second bail application of the applicant was dismissed for want of prosecution in MCRCA No. 1073 of 2024. First bail application of appellant Ashish Tiwari was dismissed for want of prosecution on24.10.2024 in MCRCA No. 1091 of 2024. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 22.02.2018 a written report was made by the complainant before Police Station Sirgitti against the Directors of Gold Key infraventure, alleging that on 30.04.2015 Rs. 3,60,000/- was deposited by him in monthly pension scheme of Gold Key infraventure company and as per scheme, he has to receive interest of Rs. 5700/- for 72 months. The applicants gave him bond paper along with PDC, cheque for return of principle amount with agreement papers. It is alleged that the applicants gave only 4 months interest from May 2015 to August, 2015 thereafter, they completely stopped making payment to him. Subsequently, he submitted an application along with relevant paper for early disbursement of his money at local address i.e. Ambe Plaza Bus Stand, but no amount was paid to him and it came to his knowledge that the accused persons induced him and after having closed the company, they fled away Odisha from Chhattisgarh. On the basis of written report, offence under Sections 420/34 of the IPC was registered against the applicants. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. They would further submit that the main allegation of offence is against Sanjuy Dhar Badgaiya and no offence is made out against them and Sanjay Dhar Badgaiya died on 23.05.2018, therefore, they have no knowledge of the affairs of the company. They would further submit that learned Sessions Judge in MJC No. 60/2016 has attached movable or immovable property of main accused Sanjay Dhar Badgaiya and amount has been returned to the victims. They would further submit that the applicants were not aware of the criminal proceedings, as they were under impression that after death of main accused late Sanjy Dhar Badgaiya, the proceeding came to an end and the applicants were not the Directors of the company. They would further submit that applicant Ashish Tiwari is aged about 45 years and applicant Aakriti Tiwari is aged about 50 years, and they have no criminal past antecedents. They would further submit that co-accused namely Goverdhan Prasad Verma has already been granted bail by this Court on 26.07.2019 in MCRCA No. 786 of 2019, therefore, he prays for extending the benefit of Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to the applicants also. 5. State counsel, on the other hand, opposing the bail application submits that the nature of allegations are such where the applicants have defrauded a large number of common people. He would further submit that the applicants who were working as Directors are responsible for the affairs of the company. He would further submit that the applicants were running a racket and cheated large number of persons in different areas. He would further submit that the applicants have misappropriated total amount of Rs. 55,41,636/- from the people of Bilaspur and did not return the money to victims, therefore, they would submit that the applicants are not liable to be granted benefit of Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. 6. On 19.11.2024 learned counsel has informed to the Court that auction proceeding has already been drawn for recovery of the said amount as per provision of Depositors Act, 2005, therefore, this Court on the same day directed the State to verify the facts and submit its report before the next date of hearing. 7. In pursuance of direction given by this Court, the State has submitted the afÏdavit that another crime No. 129 of 2016 has been registered at Police Station at D.D. Nagar, Raipur and the property of the applicants and their company was seized. Accordingly, auction proceeding was conducted and amount of Rs. 81,01,000/- has been received as sale consideration. It has also been informed that Superintendent of Bilaspur has requested Collector, Raipur to include the list of persons of Bilaspur Distt. who have been affected by the conduct of the applicants on 03.10.2024. 8. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also from the afÏdavit filed by the State, it is not clear that as to how much amount has been defrauded by the applicants at Raipur also, so that the amount can be recovered from sale consideration of the property attached by the Collector, Raipur, considering the fact that two cases of the applicants are pending at different Districts, as such their custodial interrogation is required to assess the actual alleged fraud committed by them. Submission made by counsel for the applicants that co-accused was granted bail by this Court, therefore, they are entitled to claim parity also deserves to be rejected as the coordinate bench while granting bail anticipatory bail has recorded its finding that applicant Goverdhan Prasad Verma was not named in the FIR and in fact he has invested Rs. 3,00,000/- with the applicants, therefore, I am of the view that the bail applications of the applicants deserve to be rejected. Accordingly, both the bail applications are rejected. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Santosh