1 2025:CGHC:7558 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1201 of 2025 Pramod Mourya S/o Chamruram Mourya Aged About 35 Years R/o Matidevpara, Village Sonarpal, P.S. Bhanpuri, District Bastar (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Bhanpuri Jagdalpur District Bastar (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant(s) : Smt. Supriya Upasane, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12/02/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 116/2024 registered at Police Station Bhanpuri Jagdalpur District Bastar (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Code. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the present applicant had taken Rs.1,70,000/- from the complainant, namely, Dilip Kumar Kashyap on the pretext of providing job of peon at Educational Department and has also prepared forged appointment letter, thus committed the alleged crime. The Police have registered the FIR against the applicant and other co-accused person, namely, Narayan Baghel and also charge sheeted one Abhijeet Pratap Singh, thereafter, the applicant was arrested. Hence the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that the applicant has neither prepared any forged any false document nor he prepared any government document, the appointment letter presented in the case has not been issued by any government instituted under its seal, rather the said document has been issued by the co-accused Abhijeet Singh to appoint him as Watchman in his ofÏce at Jagdalpur, where the complainant had worked for 03 months, but when accused Abhijeet has not paid him the salary the complainant has lodged the present FIR. The applicant is in jail since 08.11.2024, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the 3 present case. She further submits that the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons had taken Rs.1,70,000/- from the complainant on the pretext of providing job of peon at Educational Department by preparing forged appointment letter, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 08.11.2024, the fact that though the allegation against the applicant that he alongwith other co-accused persons had taken Rs. 1,70,000/- from the complainant on the pretext of providing job of peon at Educational Department by preparing forged appointment letter, but the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge- sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant-Pramod Mourya, involved in Crime No. 116/2024 registered at Police Station Bhanpuri Jagdalpur District Bastar (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467 and 468 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 4 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 sufÏcient 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 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil