1 2025:CGHC:48751 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7669 of 2025 Bhukhan Lal Arya S/o Late Ram Lal Arya Aged About 46 Years R/o Gram Bhediya Nawagaon, P.S. Balod Dist. Balod, Ward No. 10 P.S. Dantewada, District Dantewada. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through -Station House Officer, Police Station - Dantewada, District Dantewada Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Bajpai, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Dr. Saurabh K. Pande, Deputy A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23.09.2025 1. This is the Second Bail Application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 20/2022 registered at Police Station – Dantewada, District Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (In short, IPC). 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 4736/2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.06.2025 on merits. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the present applicant, along with Smt. Gauri Mandawi and Tulsi Ram Baghel, with the intent to deceive and commit fraud, from 28.04.2020 to 28.01.2024, willfully and with malafide intention, cheated the complainant, Shri Naresh Minj, by failing to deposit an amount of Rs.21,58,330/- into the State Bank of India account of Antvavsayi Sahkari Vikas Samiti, Dantewada, thereby misappropriating the said amount and committing fraud. Based on this information, Police Station Dantewada registered Crime No. 20/2022 on 03.03.2022, and subsequently, the applicant was arrested on 08.07.2024. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant’s earlier bail application was rejected by this Hon’ble Court on merits. He further submits that, so far as the status of the trial is concerned, out of 25 prosecution witnesses, a total of 18 witnesses have been examined till July 2025, and the applicant is in judicial custody since 08.07.2024. It is also submitted that the applicant’s house was destroyed due to floods, and his wife, Smt. Duleshwari Arya, passed away on 18.01.2025. From the wedlock, they have a daughter, Twinkle Arya, and the applicant is now the sole breadwinner as well as the only surviving member of his family. In these circumstances, he prays that the applicant be granted bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that this is the second bail application and the earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits and so far as the status of the trial is concerned, out of 25 prosecution witnesses, a total of 18 witnesses have been examined till July 2025, and the applicant is in judicial custody since 08.07.2024, further the fact that the applicant’s house was destroyed due to floods, and his wife, Smt. Duleshwari Arya, passed away on 18.01.2025, from the wedlock, they have a daughter, Twinkle Arya, and the applicant is now the sole breadwinner as well as the only surviving member of his family, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicant – Bhukhan Lal Arya, involved in Crime No. 20/2022 registered at Police Station – Dantewada, District Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on 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. 4 (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him 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 him, 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 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 him 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 three months from the receipt of 5 certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 10. 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 Rahul Dewangan