1 2025:CGHC:5329 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3 of 2025 Hemlal Markam S/o Mr. Sonuram Markam Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Aamdih, Vishrampuri, P.S. And Tehsil Vishrampuri, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Vishrampuri, District – Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Katyayani Vishnupriya, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 29.01.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 71/2024, registered at Police Station – Vishrampuri, District – Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that one complaint has been made against the Jeevan Lal Som that he has taken the amounts from 9 person RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 in the name of providing job and for which during the course of investigation the applicant has been arrested on the basis of the memorandum statement. Hence, this application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. Further the fact that there are a total of 9 persons who have been defrauded by the main accused Jeevan Lal Som and all that 9 persons has filed their afÏdavit before the learned trial Court stating that the money which has been taken by them on the pretext of providing job, the same is returned back to all of them by the applicant, and they also raised no objection with regard to grant of bail to the present applicant. The applicant is in jail since 23.11.2024 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that one complaint has been made against the Jeevan Lal Som that he has taken the amounts from 9 person in the name of providing job and for which during the course of investigation the applicant has been arrested on the basis of the memorandum statement, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature 3 and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there is no any criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, further the fact that there are a total of 9 persons who have been defrauded by the main accused Jeevan Lal Som and all that 9 persons has filed their afÏdavit before the learned trial Court stating that the money which has been taken by them on the pretext of providing job, the same is returned back to all of them by the applicant, and they also raised no objection with regard to grant of bail to the present applicant. the applicant is in jail since 23.11.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Hemlal Markam, involved in Crime No. 71/2024, registered at Police Station – Vishrampuri, District – Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of the 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 4 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar