1 2026:CGHC:22895 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4512 of 2026 Dharmesh Dhurwe S/o Narayan Prasad Dhurwe Aged About 34 Years Resident Of 239, Ward No. 11, Kawardha, Rajmahal Chowk, Kawardha, Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh- 491995 ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Tarbahar, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Vivekanand Samaddar along with Mr. Shivanand Mishra (through video conferencing), Advocates For Respondent(s) : Dr. Sourabh Pande, Deputy Advocate General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 14/05/2026 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 2 connection with Crime No. 269/2025 registered at Police Station Tarbahar, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of IPC and Sections 6(5) and 10 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositor’s Interest Act, 2005. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that an offence was registered against the applicant/accused, Dharmesh Kumar Dhurve and other co-accused persons at Police Station Tarbahar, District Bilaspur vide Crime No. 269/2025 under Sections 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 6(5) and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Interests of Depositors Act, 2005. The allegation against the applicant is that, he along with other co-accused persons, during the period from 01.01.2021 to 25.11.2023, induced complainant Sanjay Dey and other investors to invest money in the share market on the false promise of providing higher returns and thereby dishonestly collected a total amount of Rs. 3,22,10,000/- through D.Y.P. Dhurve Brothers Consultant Private Company, but failed to repay the invested amount and cheated the investors. On the basis of a written complaint submitted by the complainant party before the Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur, FIR was registered against the applicant and other co-accused persons. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against them. The prosecution has also alleged that the applicant and co-accused, Yatindra Dhurve were directors of the company and were involved in inducing investors to deposit huge amounts and thereafter dishonestly withholding 3 the same. Co-accused Harshita Sharma is stated to be absconding. 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 one of the co- accused, namely, Yatindra Dhurwe, who also involved in the present case has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 01.05.2026 passed in MCRC No.3409 of 2026, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has two criminal antecedents, one is of the year 2024 and another is of the year 2025 of identical nature. The applicant is in jail since 05.09.2023, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, 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 present case. He further submits that the allegation against the applicant that he being a Director of D.Y.P. Dhurve Brothers Consultant Private Company, he, along with other co-accused persons, induced investors to deposit huge amounts of money in the name of investment in the share market on the promise of high returns, collected about Rs. 3,22,10,000/-, and thereafter dishonestly failed to return the invested amount, thereby cheating the investors. However, could not dispute the fact that co- 4 accused, Yatindra Dhurwe, who also involved in the present case has already been granted bail by this Court. 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 19.08.2025, the fact that though the applicant being a Director of D.Y.P. Dhurve Brothers Consultant Private Company, he, along with other co-accused persons, induced investors to deposit huge amounts of money in the name of investment in the share market on the promise of high returns, collected about Rs. 3,22,10,000/-, and thereafter dishonestly failed to return the invested amount, but considering the fact that co-accused, namely, Yatindra Dhurwe, who also involved in the present case has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 01.05.2026 passed in MCRC No.3409 of 2026, also considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant, which are two in number, one is of the year 2024 and another is of the year 2025 of identical nature and the fact that 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. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Dharmesh Dhurwe, involved in Crime No. 269/2025 registered at Police Station Tarbahar, District- Bilaspur 5 (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of IPC and Sections 6(5) and 10 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositor’s Interest Act, 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, 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 6 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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil