1 2025:CGHC:6584 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9127 of 2024 Kamal Kishor Netam S/o Birbal Netam, Aged About 28 Years R/o Chuchuhiyapara Bilaspur, Police Station- Torwa, District- Bilaspur (C.G.). ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Rakhi, District- Raipur ( C.G.). ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Paras Mani Shriwas, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 05/02/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 225/2024 registered at Police Station – Rakhi, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS. 2. Prosecution case in brief is that on 17/10/2024, the complainant namely Chaman Lal Sahu has made written complaint before the Police Station-Rakhi, District-Raipur stating therein that he is working as Sub Engineer in Public Works Department, Sector-17, New Raipur (C.G.), after converting his mobile SIM as E-SIM a sum of Rs. 8,86,186.71/- has been withdrawn by unknown persons from his S.B.I. Account No. 303496xxxxx and Union Bank Account No. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 7124020100xxxxx through the UPI within a period of 24/09/2024 to 07/10/2024 and on the basis of said complaint Crime No. 225/2024 has been registered against the unknown persons and during the course of investigation applicant has been arrested on 21/07/2024. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent, reputed person and has not been involving in the alleged offence but the prosecution authorities has falsely implicated to him in this crime in question. He further submits that the applicant has never prosecuted implicated in any case whatsoever, before this and the actual fact of the case is that the applicant is working as sales boy in the flip cart company and during the course of his duty period some dispute has happened amongst the other stop members then he falsely been implicated through the help of complainant. He further submits that as per seizer memo, no any article as well as any amount has been seized from possession of the applicant, then prima facie no involvement of the applicant has been shown. Then no any case has been made out against the applicant under section 318 (4) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 and he is in jail since 05.12.2024, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent however, the applicant/accused was fraudulently withdrawing a total of Rs 8,86,186.71/- from the complainant’s account through UPI between 24.09.2024 and 07.10.2024 in connivance with other co-accused and causing 3 financial loss to the complainant. 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 offence levelled against the applicant and the fact that as per seizure memo, no any article as well as any amount has been seized from the possession of the applicant, prima facie no involvement of the applicant has been shown and further he has no criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 05.12.2024 and the conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant – Kamal Kishor Netam, involved in Crime No. 225/2024 registered at Police Station – Rakhi, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS, 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 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 4 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. (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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal