Marwahi (C.G.) v. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN State Of Chhattisgarh T
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:17640 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2530 of 2025 Ramzan Khan @ Rahim Khan S/o Salim Khan Aged About 34 Years R/o Ward No. 4, Gorakhpur, Police Station And Tahsil Gaurela, Distt. Gaurela- Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - Gaurela, Distt. Gaurela- Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Kishore Narayan, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sakib Ahmed, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17/04/2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 436/2024 registered at Police Station- Gaurela, District- Gaurela- Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections420, 406 of IPC. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the complainant Sangita Dhurve lodged an FIR before the concerned police station stating 2 therein that the applicant and his mother co-accused Sofia Khan gathered some of the women of the village and stated that they work for the bank and by creating groups of the women they facilitate loan from the bank in low interests. Pursuant to this, some of the women deposited 5,000/- to 7,000/- Rupees by filling of forms. The name of the banks which gave loan were Fusion Finance, IDFC First Bank, ESAF Cooperative Society and Fincare Small Finance Bank. Loan amounting to Rs. 30,000/- to 50,000/- was passed and it was alleged that this money was taken from applicant and co-accused Sofia Khan and in the complaint 13 women have signed as complainants. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and falsely implicated in the instant case. He further submits that the main allegation levelled against the mother of the applicant who is the co-accused, had initially taken loan for herself for business purpose. He further submits that she got acquainted with process of taking loan. The bank ofÏcials asked her to bring clients for giving loans to eligible women thereafter, the women themselves requested for help from mother of the applicant, co-accused Sofia Khan helped this woman to get loan by submitting their documents, for this help, she charged 200/- per woman. Thereafter, these women did not repay the loan and bank started demanding repayment of loan. Thereafter, this false FIR was registered in order to avoid repayment of loan. The present applicant had accompanied his mother to the place of meeting and he did not have any conversation with any women. Only for this reason, he has also been made co-accused. He also submits that the present applicant is a fish vendor and buys fish from Bilaspur and sells it on different weekly markets, for this purpose 3 he is always out of his house in day time and he has not contact with any women. This is the reason why the complainant named him as Rahim Khan. These women don't even know the real name of applicant which is Ramzan Khan. It seems that at the instance of the somebody else, he has been made an accused. It is also pertinent to mention with the same allegation, another FIR is registered being crime No. 434/2024. In this FIR, the applicant has not been named. This shows that the present applicant was at no point of time communicated with the complainants in this case and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he has explained the criminal antecedent of the applicant through additional documents, the trial is likely to take some time therefore he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant and his mother, co-accused Sofia Khan, allegedly gathered village women, claiming to facilitate low-interest loans from banks by forming groups. Women deposited ₹5,000-₹7,000, filling out forms for loans from banks like Fusion Finance and IDFC First Bank. Loans of ₹30,000-₹50,000 were sanctioned, but the money was allegedly taken by the applicant and co-accused-Sofia Khan. A complaint was filed with 13 women as signatories. Hence, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 4 30.01.2025 and the fact that the main allegation levelled against the mother of the applicant who is the co-accused, had initially taken loan for herself for business purpose and committed fraud with the women and the allegation levelled against the applicant is that the present applicant had accompanied his mother to the place of meeting and he did not have any conversation with any women still, he has also been made accused and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and applicant has three criminal antecedent which has been explained through additional document and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 8. Let the applicant – Ramzan Khan @ Rahim Khan, involved in Crime No. 436/2024 registered at Police Station- Gaurela, District- Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406 of IPC. 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 5 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. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith. S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice - Kunal