1 2025:CGHC:7750 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8474 of 2024 Punit Singh S/o Late Rajendra Singh Aged About 43 Years R/o 505, Block No. 22 To 27, Naya Raipur P.S. Rakhi Tahsil And District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer Police Station Tikrapara, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) ---- Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Manish Nigam, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.02.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 710/2024 registered at Police Station- Tikrapara, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338(3), 61(2), 3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainants namely, KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Animika Vaishnav and Ramvati Gupta have made written complaint before the concerned police station with intend that the Rakesh Mandal and his friend were running business of Ishini Homes Pvt. Ltd. at Progressive Point Lalpur Raipur and they have deposited amount of Rs. 47,00,000/- in the said Pvt. Ltd. for providing R.D.A. house in Kamal Vihar Raipur, but the accused persons did not provide any house and not returned the such amount to them. Based upon such complaint, the police has registered the offence punishable under section 318 (4), 338 (3), 61 (2), 3 (5) of B.N.S. against the present applicant and others accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant has been roped in the present case only on the basis of memorandum of co-accused with is inadmissible in evidence. He further submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and there is no direct evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged offences. The present applicant has neither obtained any amount from the complainants nor committed any fraud and cheating and nor committed any aforesaid offences as alleged by the prosecution against him and transaction of subject amount has been done in between main accused persons and complainants with regard to providing RDA house in which the applicant has not played any role in connection of this crime. He also submits that the applicant was the employee of the firm run by the main accused Rakesh Mandal and as such have no nexus with the main accused in the commission of offence and he is in jail since 09.11.2024 and 3 the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submits that the present applicant along with his accomplice, opened an ofÏce of Aishini Homes Private Limited at Progressive Point, Lalpur, and cheated them of Rs. 47 lakhs by promising to provide RDA houses in Kamal Vihar. Accordingly, he 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 allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the the present applicant being an employee of that firm and he has made accused only on the basis of memorandum statement of the co-accused and further he is not named in the FIR and there is no direct evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged offences and the transaction of subject amount has been done between the main accused persons and complainants with regard to providing RDA house and further the case of the present applicant is distinguishable from that case of co-accused and he is in jail since 09.11.2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the applicant – Punit Singh, involved in Crime No. 710/2024 4 registered at Police Station- Tikrapara, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338(3), 61(2), 3(5) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. 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 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, 5 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 313 Cr.P.C. 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 him 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 forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal