Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:7537 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1209 of 2025 Sunil Kumar S/o Shri Rambachan Aged About 35 Years R/o Baruni, P.S. - Jamuniya, District - Gajipur (U.P.). --- Presently R/o House No. B-25/03, B Type, B.D.A. Colony, Salainya, Bhopal (M.P.). versus ... Applicant State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, P.S. - Baikunthpur, District - Koriya (C.G.). ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Akhtar Hussain, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Deputy A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 12.02.2025 Order on Board 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 168/2024, registered at Police Station : Baikunthpur, District – Koriya, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 15.05.2024, the complainants namely Parmeshwar Rajwade, Hridaylal Rajwade, Harigovind Prasad Rajwade, Mahesh Kumar, and others lodged a RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.02.13 11:14:09 +0530 2 complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.). They alleged that the accused, Sunil Kumar, son of Ram Bachan, residing in Govindpur, Bhopal (M.P.), falsely presented himself as a representative of AIMS, Bhopal and claimed to be related to government ministers. He allegedly assured the complainants that he had high-level connections and could secure them jobs in various positions across Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Relying on these claims, the complainants transferred a total sum of Rs. 20 lakhs to the accused via online payment. However, no jobs were provided as promised. As a result, the accused has been charged with committing the aforementioned offence. Following the registration of the crime, the accused was taken into custody, and relevant documents were seized. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the applicant has no connection whatsoever with the alleged crime. He is, in fact, running a coaching institute named EESHANI Classes, which is registered with the Government of India (Ministry of Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises) and operates at Horion Pvt. ITI, near Malharkunj, Bhopal, M.P. He also submits that the dispute between the complainants and the accused is merely a minor issue related to student admissions and studies. However, to take undue advantage of the criminal justice process, the present case has been falsely registered against him, causing him to unnecessarily endure criminal proceedings. It is pertinent to mention that the alleged 3 amount in question does not match the complainants’ claims. While the complainants assert that a total sum of Rs. 20 lakhs was transferred to the applicant via online transactions, an examination of the applicant’s bank account reveals transactions amounting to only Rs. 9 lakhs. Therefore, the allegations made against the applicant cannot be deemed reliable. He further submits that the present applicant is in jail since 30.12.2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail in the present case. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the applicant has committed fraud by taking money Rs. 20 lakh from the complainants on the pretext of providing job, and he failed to provide the promised job and did not return the money to them. Therefore, the present applicant is not entitled to be granted regular bail in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the present applicant is running a coaching institute named EESHANI Classes, which is registered with the Government of India (Ministry of Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises) and operates at Horion Pvt. ITI, near Malharkunj, Bhopal, M.P., and the dispute between the complainants and the accused is merely a minor issue related to student admissions and studies, however, to 4 take undue advantage of the criminal justice process, the present case has been falsely registered against him, causing him to unnecessarily endure criminal proceedings, and the alleged amount in question does not match the complainants’ claims, while the complainants assert that a total sum of Rs. 20 lakhs was transferred to the applicant via online transactions, an examination of the applicant’s bank account reveals transactions amounting to only Rs. 9 lakhs, and further the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 30.12.2024, the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Sunil Kumar, involved in Crime No. 168/2024, registered at Police Station : Baikunthpur, District – Koriya, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 5 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 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. 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of six months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Rahul Dewangan Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice