1 2025:CGHC:55862 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8912 of 2025 Shiv Dewangan S/o Late Subhash Dewangan Aged About 25 Years R/o Jai Satmbh Chowk, Kalarpara, Police Station- Kotwali Rajnandgaon, Tehsil And District- Rajnandgaon, C.G. ... Petitioner versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The S H O- Kotwali Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon, C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Satish Gupta, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 17.11.2025 1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “ BNSS”) for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 60/2024 registered at Police Station – Kotwali Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120-B and 34 of Indian Penal Code. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Devlal lodged a report in the concerned Police Station alleging that he was informed by the Bank Manager ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.11.18 15:47:21 +0530 2 of Canara Bank that huge transactions have been made in his account as well in the account of his wife, upon which he came to know that the account which was opened through Vinayak Sahu was misused, passbook as well as the ATM card were also kept by him and not handed over to the account holder i.e. complainant and his wife. He lodged a report to the concerned Police Station intimating the aforementioned facts. Based upon which initially crime was registered against Vinayak Sahu. During course of investigation , applicant was arrested on 11.10.2025. 3. Learned counsel for applicant would submit that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this crime. According to material collected in case diary it is alleged that applicant has taken bank account recorded in the name of complainant from Shahbaz Khan in which there is a transaction of about Rs. 2 crore. Shahbaz Khan, co-accused has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 2987 of 2024 and other co-accused Vinayak Sahu at whose instance complainant opened an account in the concerned bank has also been enlarged on bail by this Court in MCRC No. 2712 of 2024 vide order dated 30.04.2024. He also submits that after investigation supplementary charge-sheet has already been filed. Hence, present applicant may also be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for applicant and would submit that from material collected during course of investigation it is appearing that applicant was operating the account of complainant and there is transaction of more than 2 crores, however, he do not dispute the fact that two co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by this Court. 5.I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents placed along with this bail application. 6. On due consideration of submission made by counsel for respective parties, investigation has already been completed, supplementary charge- sheet has been filed and particularly to the fact that two co-accused persons 3 have been enlarged on bail by this Court, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to allow the application. 7.Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) 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. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) 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. (d) 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. 4 Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) alfiza JUDGE