1 2026:CGHC:24411 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4998 of 2026 Devanand Sonwani S/o Rishi Kumar Sonwani Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Doma Ward No. 2, Police Station Mujgahan, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Balod, District- Balod Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Prabhat Kumar Saxena, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, Dy.A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17/06/2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 612/2024 registered at Police Station Balod, District Balod, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2) and 3(5) of GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2026.06.18 20:17:55 +0530 2 Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. (for short 'BNS'). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Smt. Bhamin Kunjam has lodged a report in Police Station Balod, District Balod (C.G.) alleging therein that, the applicant and other accused persons allegedly cheated rural women of Rs.36,13,000/- by forming groups in villages, encouraging them to take loans with false promises of agricultural investment and then keeping the money without repayment. They later formed a company named RDB FX and invested Rs.88 lakhs taken from the women and others into trading, which resulted in heavy losses, only Rs.8 lakhs has been returned. The main accused, namely; Kholbahara Nishad also invested Rs.2 crore 88 lakhs in platinum coins and the same company, which was lost due to a market crash. The fraud amount was allegedly invested in a company jointly owned by the applicant and the other accused persons. Based on these allegations, an FIR has been registered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated 22/05/2025 in MCRC No.4048/2025. He would submit that second bail application of the co-accused Rakesh Kumar Jangde has been allowed by this court in MCRC No.4244/2026 on 07/05/2026 and also first bail application of the co-accused Virendra Dahriya has been allowed by this Court in MCRC No.4554/2026 on 14/05/2026. He would submit that the applicant is in jail since 04/06/2025 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application 3 but do not dispute the fact that co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated 22/05/2025 in MCRC No.4048/2025. Considering the fact that second bail application of the co-accused Rakesh Kumar Jangde has been allowed by this court in MCRC No.4244/2026 on 07/05/2026 and also first bail application of the co-accused Virendra Dahriya has been allowed by this Court in MCRC No.4554/2026 on 14/05/2026, further the fact that the applicant is in jail since 04/06/2025 and also considering the fact that trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the second bail application is allowed and it is directed that the Applicant- Devanand Sonwani involved in Crime No. 612/2024 registered at Police Station Balod, District Balod, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2) and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 4 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 of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri