1 2025:CGHC:976 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9109 of 2024 Mafid Beg S/o Mustkim Beg Aged About 36 Years Permanent R/o C-48, Ring Road No.2, Parijat Extension, Behind Pallaw Bhawan Bilaspur Chhattisgarh At Present R/o B-27, Ashiyana Phase-2, Avanti Vihar, Vijay Nagar, Telibandha, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Kondagaon, District- Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vinod Kumar Tekam, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Deputy Adv. General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07/01/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 284/2024 registered at Police Station- Kondagaon, District- Kondagaon (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of B.N.S. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, the complainant has lodged an FIR before the concerned Police Station stating therein that the KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 applicant has obtained Rs. 5,14,200/- from the complainant and other person for providing government job but the same has not provided and not returned the said amount. Based upon such complaint, the police has registered the aforesaid offence against the applicant. 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 offence under Section 318(4) of B.N.S. has not made because as per statement under Section 180 of the complainant and other witnesses, the applicant has not deceived any person, fraudulently and dishonestly induced. One of the complainant namely Amarjeet Netam has executed agreement with the applicant and the complainant has given amount of Rs. 1,64,000/- to the applicant as borrower due no needed domestic work, by executing agreement dated 13.08.2024. The prosecution has not seized documents from the possession of the applicant with regard to transaction of the money. He further submits that the applicant has not cheated and committed fraud with the complainant and not obtained any amount to provide job and nor committed any aforesaid offences as alleged by the prosecution against him and the applicant is in jail since 30.09.2024 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and and submits that the applicant has cheated the complainant and obtained Rs. 3 5,14,200/- from the complainant on the pretext of providing Job and thereafter, he failed to do so, as such, the present 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 30.09.2024 and the fact that in the present case, charge- sheet has been filed before the competent Court and further the prosecution has not seized any documents from the possession of the applicant with regard to transaction of the money and no further interrogation is required, the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. 7. Let the applicant – Mafid Beg, involved in Crime No. 284/2024 registered at Police Station- Kondagaon, District- Kondagaon (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of B.N.S, 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. 4 (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 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 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. dirurt fo forthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal