Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:8166 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1334 of 2025 Sunil Sahu S/o Ramcharan Sahu Aged About 30 Years R/o Village - Mahora, P.S. And Tehsil - Patna, District Koriya Chhattisgarh versus ... Applicant State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station - Baikunthpur, District Koriya Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Deputy A.G. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17/02/2025 1. 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. 288/2024, registered at Police Station – Baikunthpur, District- Koriya (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 472, 473, 474, 475, and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, under Section 3 & 4 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 and Sections 6 & 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act 2005. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.02.18 11:24:47 +0530 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Spandana Sphoorty 2 Financial Ltd. is a microfinance company that provides small business loans to self-help groups. The applicant, along with other co-accused, went to the village and allegedly committed fraud by opening accounts and deceiving 391 rural women. They sanctioned loans of Rs. 42,000/- each, totaling Rs. 1,63,81,000/- to these women for the business of dona pattal (leaf plate making). As a result, an offence under Sections 409, 420, 120(B), 467, 468, 471, 472, 473, and 474 of the IPC, along with Sections 3 and 4 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, and Sections 6 and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors’ Interest Act, 2005, has been registered against the applicant. The applicant has been arrested and is currently in jail. 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 the present applicant was never involved in any kind of offence and further applicant never received any money from complainant who made allegation against him, and complainant has lodged false report against the applicant. He also submits that other co-accused persons, namely, Smt. Sunita and Dilkash Kadri have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 20.12.2024 and 14.01.2025 in MCRC Nos. 8158/2024 and 315/2025 respectively and the case of present applicant is similar to that of the co-accused, further the applicant has only 01 3 criminal antecedent, in which he has already been acquitted, the applicant is in jail since 19.09.2024, 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 on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant, along with other co-accused, went to the village and allegedly committed fraud by opening accounts and deceiving 391 rural women. They sanctioned loans of Rs. 42,000/- each, totaling Rs. 1,63,81,000/- to these women for the business of dona pattal (leaf plate making), further the applicant has one criminal antecedent, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of 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, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 19.09.2024, the fact that though the applicant, along with other co-accused, went to the village and allegedly committed fraud by opening accounts and deceiving 391 rural women, they sanctioned loans of Rs. 42,000/- each, totaling Rs. 1,63,81,000/- to these women for the business of dona pattal, but other co- accused persons, namely, Smt. Sunita and Dilkash Kadri have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 4 20.12.2024 and 14.01.2025 in MCRC Nos. 8158/2024 and 315/2025 respectively and the case of present applicant is similar to that of the co-accused, so far as the criminal antecedent of the applicant is concerned, he has only 01 criminal antecedent, in which he has already been acquitted and 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 on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Applicant- Sunil Sahu, involved in Crime No. 288/2024, registered at Police Station – Baikunthpur, District- Koriya (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 472, 473, 474, 475, and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, under Section 3 & 4 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 and Sections 6 & 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 5 counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient 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 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. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan