1 2025:CGHC:50962 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4926 of 2025 Navneet Soni S/o Rajendra Prasad Soni Aged About 43 Years R/o Panchsil Gali, Bharam Road Ambikapur Police Station And Tehsil - Ambikapur District - Sarguja (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Kusmi, District- Balrampur - Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Adhitya Dhar Diwan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Dy. Adv. General along with Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.10.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 39/2025 registered at Police Station Kusmi, District – Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. As per the case of the prosecution, on the basis of a complaint made by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.10.15 13:18:11 +0530 2 the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Shankargarh, to the Head Office of the Bank at Raipur, it was alleged that a huge financial fraud had taken place in the Jila Sahakari Bank, Branches Shankargarh and Kusmi. It was further alleged that large-scale financial and suspicious transactions were carried out from Account Nos. 604007085677, 604007009117, and 604007013601. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, the Bank constituted an investigation team and directed for an audit report to be prepared by the Bank’s Chartered Accountant. As per the audit report, financial irregularities to the tune of Rs. 13,14,82,590/- were found in the aforesaid accounts. Thereafter, on the basis of the said audit report, the Bank sought a special audit, and it was revealed that twelve persons named in the FIR, by hatching a criminal conspiracy, had opened fake bank accounts and fraudulently transferred KCC funds of farmers into the above-mentioned accounts, thereby causing a financial loss to the Bank amounting to approximately Rs. 26 crores. It was also found that a portion of the said amount had been transferred to various bank accounts, including those of Mahamaya Construction, Jamuna Alankar Shop, and several other individuals. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the applicant has not committed any offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. He further submits that the the applicant is running a jewellery shop in the name and style of M/s Jamuna Alankar Mandir at Ambikapur. The allegation against the present applicant is that the co-accused, namely Ashok Soni (Bank Employee), had made transactions amounting to Rs. 1.5 crores from the year 2018 to 2022, on different dates, from the accounts in which irregularities have been found, to the bank account of the applicant’s 3 shop, M/s Jamuna Alankar Mandir. He also submits that the applicant is a bona fide gold merchant, and the co-accused Ashok Soni along with his wife used to visit the applicant’s shop for purchasing gold jewellery since 2018. The payments for the jewellery purchased were made through online mode. He submits that the co-accused Ashok Soni and his wife purchased gold jewellery and ornaments from the applicant’s shop on various dates between 2017 and 2022. The co-accused Ashok Soni made payments for each GST invoice (purchase bill) through NEFT from his bank account to the bank account of M/s Jamuna Alankar Mandir (the applicant’s shop). He further submits that the annexures annexed with the bail clearly show that the amounts were transferred through NEFT from the bank account of Ashok Soni to the bank account of M/s Jamuna Alankar Mandir towards the consideration of gold jewellery purchased by Ashok Soni and his wife under valid GST invoices. He submits that the applicant is a registered gold jewellery dealer having a valid GST registration number, and the business is carried on strictly in accordance with law. He submits that the applicant being a lawful businessman has only carried out legitimate B2C (Business to Customer) transactions with the co-accused and issued GST invoices for every purchase made. The essential ingredients of Section 420 of the IPC are completely absent in the present case. In the absence of any wrongful gain or wrongful loss, the offence of cheating cannot be said to have been made out. He further submits that the there is an unexplained delay in lodging the present FIR. He further submits that the being a bona fide businessman, the applicant has only carried out legitimate business transactions with customers in accordance with law. There exists no conspiracy or collusion between the applicant and the other co-accused, nor has the applicant derived any wrongful gain. 4 He further submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 01.06.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. They further submit that in compliance with this Hon’ble Court’s order dated 28.08.2025, the Investigating Officer of the aforesaid case submitted an affidavit stating that an FIR bearing Crime No. 39/2025 was registered at Police Station Kusmi, District Balrampur–Ramanujganj (C.G.) against the present applicant and other co-accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, and 34 of the IPC, 1860 [corresponding to Sections 316(5), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023], on the basis of a complaint made by the Branch Manager, District Cooperative Bank, Ambikapur. It is alleged that the co-accused persons, including bank employees, misappropriated government funds through 10–15 fake accounts. Upon detection, the CEO, Janpad Panchayat Shankargarh, constituted an inquiry committee, which found financial irregularities in 138 entries and estimated misappropriation of Rs. 26,47,82,462.93/- during 2013–14 to 2023–24. During investigation, it was revealed that Rs. 19.22 crores were withdrawn from the account of Aadim Jati Samiti, Jamdi Saan, Rs. 91.57 lakhs from CEO Janpad Panchayat Shankargarh, Rs. 3.19 crores from NREGA Dhaneshpur, and Rs. 40.54 lakhs were transferred to Jamuna Alankar, totaling Rs. 23.74 crores. A special audit conducted by M/s Tank Khatri & Associates further found illegal transfers of Rs. 1.36 crores to Ashok Kumar Soni, Rs. 46.44 lakhs to Prakash Kumar Singh, Rs. 96.36 lakhs to Sudesh Kumar Yadav, and 5 Rs. 30 lakhs to Mahamaya Construction, totaling Rs. 26.47 crores. It is further submitted that the applicant was arrested on 01.06.2025. During investigation, his memorandum was recorded wherein he admitted that M/s Jamuna Alankar, located at Brahm Road, Ambikapur, is a family-run jewellery business operated by him, and that Ashok Kumar Soni used to purchase jewellery since 2017, making online payments from his bank accounts. He stated that payments totaling Rs. 1.82 crores were received between 2018–2021, though invoices were not issued for some transactions. It also submitted that the investigation alleges that all accused persons, including the applicant, conspired to misappropriate government funds through fake accounts and illegal transactions, thereby committing offences under Section 120-B IPC, therefore, looking to the seriousness of the case, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. Learned State Counsel further submitted that the other co-accused persons, namely Ashok Soni, Prakash Kumar Singh, and Sudesh Kumar Yadav, who are employees of the Jila Sahakari Bank, had fraudulent transactions in their accounts amounting to Rs. 1,36,95,199.93/-, Rs. 46,44,841, and Rs. 96,36,814/- respectively. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, as the incident complained of pertains to the period between 2013 and 2022, whereas the FIR was registered against the applicant along with other co-accused persons, who are employees of the Jila Sahakari Bank, in the year 2025. The allegation against the present applicant, who is the owner of a jewellery shop, is that co-accused Ashok Soni, along with his wife, used to visit the applicant’s shop for purchasing gold jewellery since 6 2018, and the payments for the jewellery purchased were made through online mode. Further, the co-accused Ashok Soni and his wife purchased gold jewellery and ornaments from the applicant’s shop on various dates between 2017 and 2022. Although the main allegations are against the co-accused persons, namely, Ashok Soni, Prakash Kumar Singh, and Sudesh Kumar Yadav, who are employees of the Jila Sahakari Bank and had fraudulent transactions in their accounts amounting to Rs. 1,36,95,199.93/-, Rs. 46,44,841/-, and Rs. 96,36,814/-, respectively, the case of the present applicant is distinguishable from that of the aforesaid co-accused. Moreover, considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent court, and further the applicant has been in custody since 01.06.2025 and that conclusion of the trial may take considerable time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 8. Let the Applicant – Navneet Soni, involved in Crime No. 39/2025 registered at Police Station Kusmi, District – Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), be released on bail on his furnishing 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. 7 (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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 sufficient 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. 9. Office 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 Abhishek