Mirajuddin v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Surajpur, District Surajpur

Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. UKS Chandel, Deputy Advocate General. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI 11:03:30 +0530 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

12.02.2025 Order on Board

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. 558/2024, registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District : Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, IPC) and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005.

The case of the prosecution, is that the complainant is in touch with Ashfaq Ullah, Jarifullah and Shahrukh Ansari for the last one year and in 2 month of June 2024, Ashfaq Ullah told him that his father Jarifullah works in the share market in Adani, who has good knowledge of the share market, who invests money in such a company that doubles the money invested within 35 days, Ashfaq Ullah, Jarifullah and Shahrukh Ansari told him to invest 10,00,000/- and they will return the money in 35 days, they also issued a cheque of Rs. 10,00,000/- in favor of complainant, after a month when he asked for his said amount, they abused him with obscene language and threatened to kill him. Hence, this application.

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there are two criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant for with the bail applications have been listed today. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since

24.12.2024 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail.

On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there are two criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant for with the bail applications have been listed today, and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that the complainant is in touch with Ashfaq Ullah, Jarifullah and Shahrukh Ansari for the last one year and in month of June 2024, Ashfaq Ullah told him that his father Jarifullah works in the share market in Adani, who has good knowledge of the share market, who invests money in such a company that doubles the money invested within 35 days, Ashfaq Ullah, Jarifullah and Shahrukh Ansari told him to invest 10,00,000/- and they will return the money in 35 days, they also issued a cheque of Rs. 10,00,000/- in favor of complainant, after a month when he 3 asked for his said amount, they abused him with obscene language and threatened to kill him, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there are two criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant for with the bail applications have been listed and being allowed today, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 24.12.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application.

Let applicant, Mirajuddin, involved in Crime No. 558/2024, registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District : Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 506 and 34 of the IPC and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005, 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (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 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.

OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Preeti Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice