Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 44468 (CHH)

JOGINI MALAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/8354/2024 · 2025-01-03

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:397 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8354 of 2024 Jogini Malar W/o Kamlesh Malar Aged About 45 Years R/o Mauhar Police Station- Mauhar, District- Satna, Madhya Pradesh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Lawan District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Yogesh Chandra, Advocate. For Non-Applicant(s) : Smt. Supriya Upasane, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03/01/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 413/2024 registered at Police Station Lawan District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged an written report on 27.09.2024 alleging that two unknown women came to his house and said our company takes photographs of old utensils and jewelry and publicizes them and returns the goods like utensils and jewelry as a reward, on which complainant wife gave two pieces of silver anklets to those women, after that, the said two women came back and gave her a small steel drum and a steel tifÏn box as a prize. Thereafter the two women said that if he gave more jewelry then after promoting it by the company they will give him a bigger prize, upon which again his wife gave 10 gram silver and silver nagamori of both hand i.e 460 grams and 18 pieces of silver coin about 300 grams and gold leafs to those two women and said that they would return in the evening since evening they have not returned thereafter complainant inquired and got to know that some other villagers also cheated by those women as they have not return the goods and articles. Thereafter, the offence has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that eight of the co-accused persons, namely, Smt. Belpati, Nirmala Devi @ Nirjala, Ashok, Antaradevi, Smt. Savita Devi, Awadesh Malar, Suraj Malar and Abhiman Malar have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2024, 25.11.2024 and 20.12.2024 in MCRC Nos. 8014/2024, 8029/2024, 8149/2024 and 8253/2024 and the case of the present applicant is similar to that of the co-accused persons. 3 The applicant is in jail since 08.10.2024, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the applicant is having two criminal antecedents of similar nature, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 08.10.2024, also considering the fact that eight of the co- accused persons, namely, Smt. Belpati, Nirmala Devi @ Nirjala, Ashok, Antaradevi, Smt. Savita Devi, Awadesh Malar, Suraj Malar and Abhiman Malar have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2024, 25.11.2024 and 20.12.2024 in MCRC Nos. 8014/2024, 8029/2024, 8149/2024 and 8253/2024 and the case of the present applicant is similar to that of the co-accused persons, further the applicant has two more cases pending against her of similar nature, against which MCRC Nos.8422/2024 and 8544/2024 have been filed by her, which are also listed today and the same are allowed today itself by this Court and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the 4 applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant-Jogini Malar, involved in Crime No. 413/2024 registered at Police Station Lawan District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local 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 sufÏcient 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 sufÏcient 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. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil