1 2025:CGHC:4039 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 637 of 2025 Ramprasad Bariha S/o Nandlal Bariha, Aged About 30 Years R/o Jadamuda, P.S. Basna, Dist- Mahasamund ( C.G.). ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Police Station Basna, Dist- Mahasamund ( C.G. ). ... Non-applicant For Applicant(s) : Mr. Raza Ali, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Supriya Upasne, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22.01.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 56/2024 registered at Police Station – Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that that the Branch Manager, District Cooperative Central Bank Limited Branch Pirda has lodged a report against the applicant/accused in Police Station Basna with the KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 averment that on 19.01.2024, at the paddy procurement center of Primary Agricultural Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Jadamuda Registration No. 879, co-accused Umesh Kumar Bhoi purchased paddy from farmers without seeing the loan book and the applicant Ramprasad added the paddy area of farmers to his registered area without the consent of the concerned farmer and got the paddy registered and sold the paddy and earned unfair profit. On the basis of the report of paddy procurement on such improperly added area, a First Information Report was registered against accused Ramprasad and others under Section 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC. According to the said investigation report, accused/applicant Ramprasad along with other co-accused has been found guilty of causing loss to the government by procuring paddy at the support price against the rules. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that co-accused person, namely, Umesh Kumar Bhoi has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 7363/2024 vide order dated 28.11.2024 and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused. He also submits that so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent registered against him. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.08.2024 and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 3 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the bail application of the applicant. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the co-accused namely, Umesh Kumar Bhoi has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 7363/2024 vide order dated 28.11.2024 and so far as criminal antecedent of the applicant is concerned, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and is languishing in jail since 16.08.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence I am inclined to allow this bail application on the ground of parity. 7. Let applicant, Ramprasad Bariha, involved in Crime No. 56/2024 registered at Police Station – Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC, 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 4 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them 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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal