1 CGHC010228342026 2026:CGHC:31240 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5504 of 2026 1 - Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal S/o Late Ramjhul Jaiswal Aged About 53 Years R/o Deendayal Colony, House No. LIG 221, Mangla Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Out Post Jevra Sirsa Police Station- Pulgaon, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sourabh Sonwani, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22.07.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking grant of RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 regular bail to the applicant, who is in judicial custody in connection with Crime No.434/2026 registered at Police Station- Pulgaon, OP Jevra Sirsa, District- Durg (Chhattisgarh), for the offences punishable under Sections 409 and 420 of IPC. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, who is engaged in the business of manufacturing, packaging and wholesale supply of tea leaves, vermicelli and washing powder, had appointed the applicant as his sales representative for the Bilaspur region. It is alleged that during the period from 01.04.2020 to 31.05.2022, the applicant collected sale proceeds from various traders but failed to deposit the same in the complainant's firm's account and thereby misappropriated an amount of ₹38,00,000/-. It is further alleged that on being confronted, the applicant admitted the misappropriation, executed a written undertaking, and issued cheques towards repayment of the misappropriated amount and the consequential loss suffered by the complainant. It is also alleged that the applicant and his wife agreed to sell their residential house to the complainant in discharge of the outstanding liability; however, they neither honoured the undertaking nor repaid the amount. As no action was taken by the police on the complainant's representations, he filed an application under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pursuant to which the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class directed registration of the FIR. Consequently, the present crime was registered against the 3 applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. It is contended that the present FIR is a counter-blast to the proceedings earlier initiated by the applicant before this Court in WPCR No. 759 of 2022. It is further submitted that the allegations pertain to business transactions and financial dealings arising out of an employer-employee relationship and are essentially civil in nature. Learned counsel further submits that no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required, the applicant has been in judicial custody since 25.05.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. On these grounds, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the applicant is not entitled to be released on 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, particularly the nature of the allegations, the fact that the dispute appears to have arisen out of business transactions between the parties, the applicant has been in judicial custody since 25.05.2026, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, 4 this Court is inclined to allow the present bail application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let the Applicant – Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal involved in Crime No.- 434/2026 registered at Police Station- Pulgaon, OP Jevra Sirsa, District- Durg (Chhattisgarh), for the offences punishable under Sections 409 and 420 of IPC, be released on bail on furnishing 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 his 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 5 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously from the receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 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 Ruchi