1 2025:CGHC:57813 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9625 of 2025 Siyaram Choudhari Son Of Jevanlal Choudhari Aged About 45 Years Resident Of Village Kutela, Basti Saraipali, Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House O3cer, Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shukla, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 27.11.2025 1. This is the :rst bail application :led 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. 78/2025 registered at Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the o>ence punishable under Sections 318(5) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Sunal Kumar Behra, posted as Branch Manager at Indian Overseas Bank, RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Saraipali, lodged a written report before Police Station Saraipali alleging that the accused Krishna Das, Ravishankar Patel, Hazari Chauhan, Dilip Sharma, Rajkumar Barsagde, Nilamber Vibhar, and Khirod Kumar Sahu had applied for loans and proposed to mortgage gold ornaments. The gold ornaments handed over by the accused were sent for evaluation, and the present applicant along with Siyaram Choudhari evaluated the ornaments, based on which the loans were sanctioned. It was later found that the gold ornaments were fake, and the accused persons thereby allegedly cheated and defrauded the Bank. It is further alleged that the said gold ornaments were purchased by the bene:ciaries from one Naim Uddin, who dealt in forged gold ornaments. Thereafter, an FIR was registered against the present applicant and other accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any o>ence and he has been falsely implicated in o>ence in question. He further submits that similarly situated co-accused person, namely, Gangadhar Pushti has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17.11.2025 in MCRC No. 9227/2025. He also submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 22.10.2025, the charge-sheet has been :led and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been :led in the 3 present case. She also submits that the applicant is actively involved in the fraudulent loan transaction. It is submitted that the accused, including the present applicant, evaluated gold ornaments which were later found to be fake, resulting in substantial :nancial loss to Indian Overseas Bank, Saraipali. The complainant has alleged that the applicant, along with other accused, knowingly participated in sanctioning loans on the basis of forged gold ornaments purchased from a known fraudster, Naim Uddin. She further submits that the allegations disclose a serious case of cheating and criminal conspiracy, and considering the gravity of the o>ence and the need to protect the interests of the bank. Therefore, 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 o>ence, period of detention of the applicant since 22.10.2025, the fact that the accused persons, including the present applicant, evaluated gold ornaments submitted for loan processing, which were later found to be fake, resulting in alleged cheating and defrauding of the Bank, further the ornaments were purchased by the bene:ciaries from Naim Uddin, who dealt in forged gold, but other co-accused person, namely, Gangadhar Pushti has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17.11.2025 in MCRC No. 9227/2025 and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused persons, further the 4 applicant has no criminal antecedent and the charge-sheet has been :led in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant- Siyaram Choudhari, involved in Crime No. 78/2025 registered at Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the o>ence punishable under Sections 318(5) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 :le an undertaking to the e>ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates :xed 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 :xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su3cient 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 5 presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date :xed 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 :xed 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 su3cient 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. O3ce is directed to send a certi:ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan