RAJSHEKHAR v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Office The P.S. Dantewada, District –

: Mr. Basant Kaiwartya, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board

25.03.2026

This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant arrested in connection with Crime No. 96/2021 registered at Police Station – Dantewada, District – Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34, and 409 of IPC and Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Price Chits and Money (Banning) Act, 1978 and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Mukesh Atami has lodged an FIR on 19.10.2021 to the effect that during the period from 23.12.2013 to 5.1.2014, he had invested money in Dhanlakshmi Infra and Agro Farming India Ltd to the tune of Rs.1 2 lakh i.e. Rs. 50,000/- was deposited by him on 23.12.2013 and again Rs. 50,000/- was deposited by him on 5.1.2014 and at the time of maturity i.e. 05.01.2024, he was promised to return four times the money he had already deposited i.e. Rs.205000/-. However, before returning of the aforesaid amount, the office of the Company at Jagdalpur was closed and thereby, the complainant was cheated. During investigation, it has been found that the present applicant was one of the Directors of the concerned Company. Hence, this application.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 08.08.2023 passed in MCRC No.4075/2023. It has been further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 20.09.2025, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail.

On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the bail application and submits that though the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 08.08.2023 passed in MCRC No.4075/2023, but the present case is of the year 2021 it is stated that the applicant was absconding in the present case and arrested by the Police on 20.09.2025 and the trial is under progress and the charge-sheet has already been filed against him as an absconder, the applicant happens to be one of the directors of the company in question and resident of New Delhi, and there is every likelihood that if the applicant shall be allowed bail by this Court, he

3 will abscond again. As such, the bail application deserves to be rejected. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that though the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 08.08.2023 passed in MCRC No.4075/2023, but the present case is of the year 2021 it is stated that the applicant was absconding in the present case and arrested by the Police on 20.09.2025 and the trial is under progress and the charge-sheet has already been filed against him as an absconder, the applicant happens to be one of the directors of the company in question and resident of New Delhi, and there is every likelihood that if the applicant shall be allowed bail by this Court, he will abscond again, thus, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

Accordingly, this bail application of applicant – Sanjay Choudhary involved in Crime No. 96/2021 registered at Police Station – Dantewada, District – Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34, and 409 of IPC and Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Price Chits and Money (Banning) Act, 1978 and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005, is rejected at this stage.

Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to 4 proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously.

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