1 2025:CGHC:53403 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8381 of 2025 Anup Kumar @ Anup Kumar Mishra S/o Rajendra Prasad Mishra Aged About 48 Years R/o 554/111, Kailashpuri, Chota Barha, Alambag, Lucknow (Uttar Pradesh) (Address Wrongly Mentioned In Ordersheet As 554/11) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Vidhansabha, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 31.10.2025 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. 345/2025, registered at Police Station Vidhansabha District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 308(2), 319(2) read with Section 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The prosecution, that a complaint was lodged by one Sonia Hanspal VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.11.01 14:19:54 +0530 2 (Complainant), alleging therein that "the applicant along with other co- accused, persons threatened her with digital arrest and coerced her into transferring approximately Rs. 2,83,65,000/-(Two Crores Eighty Three Lakhs and Sixty Five Thousand only) and made her transfer the total in different bank accounts. During the investigating, it was found that applicant along other two persons namely, Pradeep Kumar & Naveen Kumar Mishra, had incorporated a company in year 2022 by the name & title Shri Narayani Infra & Developers, which was into business of real estate. Further it has been alleged, by the investigating authority that on 28.07.2025 Rs. 90,00,000/- (ninety lakhs only) was transferred by the complainant into the aforesaid company's account. The present applicant has been made accused in the present crime because he was one of the members of the firm 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the applicant has no role in the commission of the alleged offence. The true facts are that the applicant was a member of the firm “Shri Narayani Infra & Developers” only at the time of its incorporation on 24.11.2022 and had resigned from the company on 22.03.2023, much prior to the alleged incident, which took place between 21.05.2025 and 10.07.2025. The alleged ICICI Bank Account No. 125905001922 in the name of the firm was used by other accused persons to obtain Rs. 90,00,000/-, and the applicant had no knowledge of or involvement in the said transaction. The charge-sheet itself shows that the transaction dated 18.06.2025 was carried out when Pradeep Kumar Singh and Arti Singh were the 3 Directors of the company, one of whom, Pradeep Kumar Singh, is presently in judicial custody in Bareilly, U.P. The applicant has filed supporting documents, including certificates from CA Pradeep Kumar Rai and CS Sanjay Deo & Associates, and a status report from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, confirming that he had resigned much earlier. Despite bringing these facts to the notice of the investigating authorities, nothing has been found connecting the applicant to the offence. It is also pertinent that the applicant was illegally arrested on 26.07.2025 from Alambagh, Lucknow, by persons in civil clothes, as shown in CCTV footage, and was produced before the Magistrate at Raipur on 28.07.2025, regarding which his wife lodged a missing report at the local police station. The applicant has neither received any amount in his account nor derived any financial benefit from the alleged transactions. Since the charge-sheet has already been filed and there is no prima facie case against him, further detention serves no purpose. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, a reputed member of society, and ready to furnish surety and abide by any conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the co-accused person has already been granted bail 4 vide order dated 27.10.2025 in MCRC No. 6677 of 2025, further considering that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court and the applicant has been in jail since 28.07.2025, and as the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Anup Kumar @ Anup Kumar Mishra, involved in Crime No. 345/2025, registered at Police Station Vidhansabha District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 308(2), 319(2) read with Section 3(5) of the BNS., be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient 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 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 5 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. 8. Office 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 vaibhav