1 2025:CGHC:52600 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8498 of 2025 Sayara Bano W/o Alim Khan Aged About 39 Years R/o Shiv Nagar Kanker Tahsil And Distt. U.B. Kanker C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Kanker, Distt. Kanker C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28/10/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 148/2025 registered at Police Station Kanker, Distt. Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant’s father, Dr. Devendra Ramteke, was acquainted with co-accused Alim Khan, who used to visit him for the treatment of his wife. In November 2018, Alim Khan falsely represented that he was working in a company in Kolkata and lured Dr. Ramteke by assuring him that if money was deposited in that company, it would be doubled, and he would receive crores of rupees in return. Believing his words, Dr. Ramteke transferred a total sum of approximately ₹75,00,000/- through online transactions and cash deposits into the accounts of Alim Khan and others. However, when the money was not returned and excuses were made, the complainant lodged a report alleging cheating, which led to the registration of alleged offence against the applicant. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that present applicant is a lady, she is the wife of co-accused, Alim Khan who is already in jail, she never lured complainant’s father to deposit any amount in any account. He also submits that on the basis of present applicant’s memorandum statement no incriminating material has been seized. The applicant is in jail since 19.06.2025, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant applicant along with co-accused Alim Khan and others, allegedly induced the complainant’s father to invest about ₹75,00,000/- on the false assurance of double returns and used forged documents to mislead him. The applicant allegedly received part of the said amount in her bank account and utilized it for personal purposes, thereby participated in the alleged offence, therefore, her bail application is liable to be rejected. 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 19.06.2025, the fact that though the applicant along with co- accused Alim Khan and others, allegedly induced the complainant’s father to invest about ₹75,00,000/- on the false assurance of double returns and used forged documents to mislead him and utilized the money for personal purposes, but considering the fact that applicant is a lady and she has no criminal antecedent, further charge-sheet has been filed, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 4 8. Let the Applicant-Sayara Bano, involved in Crime No. 148/2025 registered at Police Station Kanker, Distt. Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 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 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 court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient 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) 5 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 her in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil