1 2025:CGHC:54989 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRA No. 404 of 2025 1 - Dharmendra Singh Songara S/o Narendra Singh Songara Aged About 45 Years R/o Shikshak Nagar Badnagar District - Ujjain (M.P.) 2 - Jagdish Chandra Vyas S/o Laxminarayan Vyas Aged About 47 Years R/o Karadiya Alaud District - Ratlam (M.P.) --- Appellants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Station Basantpur District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) --- Respondent WITH CRA No. 662 of 2025 Raghuveer Singh Rathore S/o Gangu Rathore Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Gaodee Devsiv Badnagar, District Ujjain (MP) ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO PS Basantpur, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) --- Respondent WITH CRA No. 906 of 2025 Rajendra Singh Sisodiya S/o Ramsingh Sisodiya Aged About 51 Years R/o Shankar Alaud, Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh. ... Appellant 2 versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The P.S. Basantpur, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent For Appellants in CRA No.404/2025 : Mr. Tarun Dansena & Mr. Anurag Khatri, Advocates For Appellant in CRA No.662/2025 : Mr. Aman Pandey, Advocate (through VC) For Appellant in CRA No.906/2025 : None For Respondent/State : Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 10/11/2025 1. The appeal has been preferred by the appellants under Section 16(1) of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005, being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 22.11.2024 passed in Special Case (Chhattisgarh Protection of the Depositors Interest Act, 2005) No. 02/2020 by the learned Special Judge (Chhattisgarh Protection of the Depositors Interest Act, 2005), Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (Annexure A/1). 2. The prosecution case in brief is that one of the co-accused in the present case namely Mansukhlal Sonwani obtained an amount of Rs. 9.5 lakhs belonging to the complainant Rajwantin Bai Sahu and deposited the said amount in his bank account and thereafter the co- 3 accused is said to have withdrawn a substantial portion of that amount without the knowledge and permission of the complainant and have invested the money by purchasing the bonds and Aarogya Dhanvarsha Developers and Allied Co. Ltd. and the allegation against the present applicant is that he in connivance with the other co-accused person defrauded the complainant and deposited her money in the Aarogya Dhanvarsha Developers and Allied Co. Ltd. without her consent and permission. 3. On the basis of complaint made by the complainant Rajwantin Bai Sahu, the offences 420, 34 of the IPC and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of the Depositors Interest Act was registered against the accused persons including present appellant and upon completion of usual investigation, the charge sheet was submitted before the court below from where the case was committed to the learned Special Court for trial according to law. 4. In order to prove the guilt of appellants, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses. The accused/appellants denied all the allegations and their statements were recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. where he took a plea that they have falsely been implicated in the case. 5. The learned trial Court after completion of the trial, found the appellants guilty of offences as mentioned above and convicted & sentenced them as referred above, vide impugned judgment dated 22.11.2024. 4 6. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that the appellants have filed the instant appeal, against the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 22.11.2024, passed by the learned trial Court. The appellants are in jail and they are not able to deposit 75% of deposit of liability with the competent authority, therefore the appellants may kindly be exempted/dispensed from depositing the said liability. 7. Learned counsel for the State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the appellants and contended that in other connected matter of this case, this Court has passed the order on 26.06.2025 and it was directed to the appellant to deposit of 75% of the liability amount for entertainability of the appeal as per provisions under Section 16 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors and Interest Act, 2005. However, the appellant has not deposited the said liability amount till today. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and provisions of Section 16 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors and Interest Act, 2005. 10. Section 16 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors and Interest Act, 2005 provides as under : “16. Appeal – (1) An Appeal against the order passed by the special court shall lie to the High Court within thirty days from the date of order. 5 (2) No appeal shall be entertained unless it is accompanied by satisfactory proof of seventy five percent deposit of liability with competent authority. 11. Further considering the fact that in the connected matter of this case CRA 662 of 2025, this Court was passed the order on 26.06.2025 and it was directed to the appellant that it is mandate provision to deposit 75% of the liability amount to entertain the appeal and it was further directed that this appeal shall be entertained only after depositing 75% of the liability amount. Despite the clear order passed by this Court, the appellant has not been deposited the aforesaid liability amount. Further, during the course of argument, on being asked by this Court, the appellants showing inability to deposit the liability amount. 12. With the aforesaid observation, these appeals are dismissed as not maintainable. 13. Interlocutory application(s) pending, if any, stand(s) disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant