1 2026:CGHC:23316 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4627 of 2026 • Mayur Barmeda S/o Mansukhlal Barmeda Aged About 44 Years R/o House No. 112, Sector-02 Near Sai Mandir, Geetanjali Nagar, Khamhardih, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Khamtarai, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Fouzia Mirza, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Ali Afzal Mirza, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy.G.A. For Objector Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 15.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 309/2026, registered at Police Station – Khamtarai, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409 of IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that 05. the complainant Aman Agrawal is the resident of Near SBI Bank Bhanpuri, Police Station Khamtarai, Raipur and has done BBM and he is dealing in the VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.05.15 18:48:15 +0530 2 business of Onion and Garlic, the applicant/accused is a resident of Near Sai Mandir, Geetanjali Nagar, Police Station Khamhardih Raipur. He was in contact with his family since 2007-2008 and was working as Manager in ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited Branch Telibandha Raipur and he is getting the amount invested in various policies of his family members. On January 2014 the applicant/accused in this particular regard came to him and informed him and his family members that there is a new link policy in the market which is providing good benefit and since his family has already invested in policies of the applicant/accused, he and his family members had given a cheque no. 327200 dated 14.01.2014 amounting to Rs. 50,000/- of the partnership firm Nitin Onion Company for purchasing policy in the name of his mother. In this manner from 2014 to 2021 the applicant/accused used to come his office and take cheques for investment in the name of the family members (1) Aman Agrawal, (2) Suresh Agrawal (Father), (3) Lata Agrawal (Mother), (4) Geeta Devi Agrawal (Grandmother), (5) Manoj Kumar Agrawal (Uncle) & (6) Surekha Agrawal (Aunty) in the above period the applicant/accused has taken cheques of various amount on 29 different date and 01 cheque of his saving account and 04 cheques of his grandmother Geeta Devi Agrawal of her saving account. The applicant/accused have taken the amount for investing in the policy and the amount has been received on having faith in him and when the complainant asked for the policy document he began to procrastinate and did not provide him the document on July 2022, when he threaten the applicant/accused for making in complaint against him, he gave him 01 policy having number 82631180 but the rest of the document of the policies have not been provided to him. On becoming suspicious about the conduct of the 3 applicant/accused the complainant enquired with the ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited Telibandha and found that the cheque received from him and his family members were not used an investing in the policies of the family members names, but have been utilized to purchase various policies in the name of difference individual. In this manner applicant/accused in a planned manner by defrauding him and his family members have received cheque amounting to Rs. 63,00,000/- with the promise of investing in the policy, but have not used them in investing in the policies, wherein by misusing the cheques have caused wrongful loss to the complainant and have with the purpose of receiving wrongful gain have issued policy in the name of other persons and have betrayed us by committing fraud. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant has not received any wrongful gain from the investment made in the policies of different persons. It is further submitted that the cheques were handed over to the agents and the said agents misused the cheques by investing the amounts in policies in the names of different persons. Since the applicant/accused was working as a Sales Manager, he reposed trust and confidence in the agents and, on account of such mutual faith, he himself was deceived by them. It is further submitted that during the period of 12 years, neither the applicant/accused nor the complainant was aware of the fact that the policies had been purchased in the names of other persons by the agents and, therefore, from the year 2014 to 2021, the amounts continued to be invested in such policies. Learned counsel further submits that the complainant and the applicant have entered 4 into a compromise, pursuant to which an amount of Rs. 30 Lakhs has already been paid to the complainant and six post-dated cheques amounting to Rs. 6 Lakhs each have also been handed over to them. In this manner, almost the entire amount has been returned to the complainant and no dispute survives between the parties after repayment of the amount. A copy of the compromise agreement dated 02.05.2026 has been filed as Annexure-A/3. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the case. The applicant is in jail since 02.05.2026 and the trial is likely to take a considerable time to conclude. Therefore, prayer has been made to enlarge the applicant on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case. 5. Mr. Anshul Tiwari, learned counsel for the Objector submits that he has no objection in granting bail to the applicant. He also submits that complainant and the applicant have entered into a compromise and Rs. 30 Lacs has already been provided to complainant and the 06 postdated cheque amounting to Rs. 6 Lac each has also been provided to them, in this manner almost the whole amount has been returned to the complainant and no dispute remained after the amount being returned. The copy of the compromise agreement dated 02.05.2026 is annexed herewith Annexure-A/3. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the 5 fact that complainant has no objection in granting bail to the applicant and complainant and the applicant have entered into a compromise and Rs. 30 Lacs has already been provided to complainant and the 06 postdated cheque amounting to Rs. 6 Lac each has also been provided to them, in this manner almost the whole amount has been returned to the complainant and no dispute remained after the amount being returned, and charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 02.05.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, considering the period of detention of the applicant I am inclined to allow this application. 8. Let applicant, Mayur Barmeda, involved in Crime No.309/2026, registered at Police Station – Khamtarai, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409 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 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, 6 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 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaishali