1 2025:CGHC:17208 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1727 of 2025 Atish Nand S/o Sukdev Nand Aged About 26 Years R/o Village - Chhuipali, Police Station - Basna, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) .. Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, Police Station Saraipali, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent For applicant : Shri Chandra Kumar, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri U.K.S. Chandel, Dy.A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15/04/2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. 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. 364/2021 registered at Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 of Indian GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.04.21 10:53:28 +0530 2 Penal Code. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Mahendra Panda made complaint before the Police Station Saraipali stating therein that he has firm named "Awanti Tractors", where dealership of MESI Company tractor, which is operated by his father and complainant, where the applicant is working as Computer Operator, who has committed fraud by fraudulently withdrawing the money and dishonestly made signature in the name of father, mother and also the complainant. On the basis of the said report, the police has registered the crime and arrested the present applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person and he has been falsely been implicated in the present case. He would submit that the FIR has been lodged after lapse of 02 years, whereas the alleged incident took place on 04-11-2019 and complaint was made on 07-09-2021 at Police Station and no explanation regarding the delay has been given. He would submit that the applicant was working as Clerk at Awanti Tractor show room, whereas he used to work 08 AM to 09 PM, and when he asked about overtime pay, the owner of the show room scolded him and removed from the work. He would submit that the applicant has never made signature in any cheques, due to old enmity he has been implicated in this crime. He would submit that the Bank has not informed to the complainant regarding the withdrawal of the money in this matter, the applicant is in jail since 15-01-2025 and the trial will take long time for its conclusion, hence, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. He would submit that there is no criminal 3 antecedents against the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, also considering the fact that FIR has been lodged after lapse of 02 years, whereas the alleged incident took place on 04-11-2019 and complaint was made on 07-09-2021, applicant was working as a computer operator in a firm named ‘Awanti Tractors’ which is operated by complainant and his father, period of detention of the applicant since 15-01-2025 and trial will take some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicant – Atish Nand, involved in Crime No. 364/2021 registered at Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 of Indian Penal Code, 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 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 their absence, without 4 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS is issued and the applicant fail 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. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri