Nafeez Alam S/o Raees Alam Aged About 33 Years R/o House No. H.I.G.- 04 v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. MCRC No. 30
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:21459 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2236 of 2025 Nafeez Alam S/o Raees Alam Aged About 33 Years R/o House No. H.I.G.- 04, Manikpur Chowki, P.S. Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. Presently At C/o Abdul Ansari, Aman Nagar, P.S. Mowa Pandri, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. MCRC No. 3078 of 2025 --- Respondent(s) Jhagita Joshi W/o Devendra Joshi Aged About 45 Years R/o Rajendranagar, P.S. Rajendranagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Civil Lines, District Raipur. MCRC No. 3569 of 2025 --- Respondent(s) Deepesh Navrang @ Anshul S/o Sunil Navrang Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Govindra, Ward No. 02 Banjaripara, P.S. Pathariya, District Mungeli (C.G.) ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Line, District Raipur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) 2 For Applicant in MCRC Nos.2236/2025 & 3078/2025
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Raza Ali, Advocate. For Applicant in MCRC : Mr. Mohit Kumar, Advocate. No.3569/2025 For Respondent(s) : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Deputy A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08/05/2025 1. Since the above-mentioned three bail applications arise out of same crime number, they are clubbed and heard together and are
Decision
being disposed of by this common order. 2. These are the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 54/2025 registered at Police Station Civil Line, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Anjana Gahirtwar, filed a written complaint at Civil Lines Police Station alleging therein that Devendra Joshi, her uncle, had promised to help her secure a government job through his connections with high-ranking ofÏcials. In January 2021, when the complainant visited her uncle's home in Raipur, he claimed to have connections with big ofÏcers and could arrange government jobs. Later, when a vacancy for Food Inspector was announced, Devendra Joshi allegedly contacted the complainant via WhatsApp, asking her to fill 3 out the form and demanding Rs.25,00,000/- for the process. The complainant filled out the form online in 2022 and paid the money. After the exam, Devendra Joshi assured her of guaranteed recruitment as a Food Inspector. When the results were announced with the complainant scoring low marks, Devendra Joshi told her that there would be another result through special recommendation. Later, he provided her with a document at his Raipur home showing her name in the list of selected candidates. After that, Devendra Joshi called the complainant on WhatsApp and said her name had been selected, but she needed to pay the remaining amount before counseling. The complainant then gave Devendra Joshi Rs.6,35,000/- on different dates as per his demand. She also transferred Rs.3,10,000/- to his daughter Piyusha Joshi's account. Additionally, she gave Devendra Joshi cash amounts of Rs.5,50,000/-, Rs.1,50,000/- and Rs.1,60,000/-. Devendra Joshi told her to report to the Food and Civil Supplies Department for document verification, making her believe she had secured the job. However, when the final list of selected candidates was released, her name wasn't there. When she asked Devendra Joshi about it, he demanded more money, and she paid Rs.7,45,000/-. In total, she paid him Rs.25,00,000/-, but didn't get the job. Devendra Joshi stopped attending her calls and started delaying the process. The co-accused, Jhagita Joshi, was present during these transactions and assured her that the job would be secured. Both Devendra and Jhagita assured her that the money would be refunded if the job didn't materialize. The complainant also learned that Devendra 4 Joshi had taken Rs.25 lakhs each from others, including Gajendra Lahre, Kunal Dev, and Bhuneshwar Sonwani, promising them jobs that didn't materialize. Based on the complainant's written statement, aforementioned offence has been registered against the applicants and subsequently, they were arrested. Hence, the bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. They would further submits that applicants, namely, Nafeez Alam and Deepesh Navrang @ Anshul are the staff members and Jhagita Joshi is wife of main accused, Davendra Joshi, who alongwith Swapnil Dubey had committed the alleged crime, whereas there is no specific allegations levelled against present applicants, the only allegations against them is that they were present at the time of incident and collected the money after inducement done by the said co-accused persons in the name of providing job. They would also submits that two of the co- accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court, co- accused, Piyusha Joshi, who is daughter of the main accused, Davendra Joshi and who received Rs.3,10,000/- in her account as per his father’s direction has granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 05.03.2025 in MCRCA No.310/2025 and one co- accused, namely, Haldhar Behra who is also one of the staff members has granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 22.04.2025 in MCRC No.3037/2025 and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused. The applicants are 5 in jail, applicant, namely, Nafeez Alam in jail since 02.02.2025, applicant, namely, Jhagita Joshi in jail since 29.01.2025 and applicant, namely, Deepesh Navrang @ Anshul in jail since 20.03.2025, further they have no criminal antecedents, charge- sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, they prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicants alongwith other co-accused persons are alleged to have committed fraud with the complainant and other persons, they allegedly took Rs.25,00,000/- each from the complainant and other persons, which the complainant paid in different installments in the name of providing government job for the post of Food Inspector, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicants, applicant, namely, Nafeez Alam in jail since 02.02.2025, applicant, namely, Jhagita Joshi in jail since 29.01.2025 and applicant, namely, Deepesh Navrang @ Anshul in jail since 20.03.2025, the fact that though the applicants alongwith other co-accused persons are alleged to have committed fraud with the complainant and other persons in the name of providing government job for the post of Food Inspector and took allegedly Rs.25,00,000/- from the complainant in different installment, but there are only general 6 allegations levelled against the applicants, that they were present at the time of incident and collected the said money after inducement done by the main accused persons, namely, Davendra Joshi and Swapnil Dubey, there is no any specific role played by them, they were only acted upon the instructions of the said main accused persons, also considering the fact that one of the co-accused persons, namely, Haldhar Behra has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 22.04.2025 in MCRC No.3037/2025 and the case of present applicants is identical to that of the co-accused and distinguishable from that of the co-accused persons, Davendra Joshi and Swapnil Dubey, further they have no criminal antecedents and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicants - Nafeez Alam, Jhagita Joshi and Deepesh Navrang @ Anshul, involved in Crime No. 54/2025 registered at Police Station Civil Line, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 of the IPC, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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. 7 (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Akhil Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE