Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:19106 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2573 of 2025 Zarif Ullah Ansari S/o Abdul Rahim Aged About 53 Years R/o Village- Sonpuri Chowki Basdei, P.S. And District- Surajpur (C.G.) versus --- Applicant State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O. Surajpur, District – Surajpur (C.G.) --- Non-applicant Along with MCRC No. 3085 of 2025 Asfaq Ullah S/o Zarif Ullah Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Sonpur Chowki Basdei P.S. And District Surajpur (C.G.) Versus ---Applicant State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O. Surajpur, District – Surajpur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant For Non-applicant/State : :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate. Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Deputy Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 28.04.2025 Order on Board 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. 650/2024, registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District – Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, IPC) and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the applicants along with other co- 2 accused came to complainant and told him that his friend Ashfaq Ullah and his father Zarif Ullah i.e. present applicants can double the money in 52 days and tempting him to invest money, complainant gave Rs. 7,50,000/- on 21.05.2024, Ashfaq Ullah gave him a cheque of Rs. 7,50,000/- and was asked to withdraw his money from his account after 52 days through cheque and was given 2,50,000/- in cash, the cheque which as issued in favor of complainant, which was dishonour due to sufÏcient balance, therefore, the offence has been committed by the applicant. Hence, this application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case, further the fact that the applicants are happening to be father and son, and there are 3 criminal antecedents registered against the applicants respectively, including the present cases, and for rest two cases the applicants have preferred applications for grant of bail before this Court which have been listed today. It is further submitted that the charge- sheet has been filed in this case and the co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 06.03.2025 and 21.03.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 1861/2025 and 2277/2025. The applicants are in jail since 29.11.2024 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there are 3 criminal antecedents registered against the applicants respectively, and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that the applicants along with other co-accused came to complainant and told him that his friend Ashfaq 5. 6. 3 Ullah and his father Zarif Ullah i.e. present applicants can double the money in 52 days and tempting him to invest money, complainant gave Rs. 7,50,000/- on 21.05.2024, Ashfaq Ullah gave him a cheque of Rs. 7,50,000/- and was asked to withdraw his money from his account after 52 days through cheque and was given 2,50,000/- in cash, the cheque which as issued in favor of complainant, which was dishonour due to sufÏcient balance, therefore, the offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and further the fact that the applicants are happening to be father and son, and there are 3 criminal antecedents registered against the applicants respectively, including the present cases, and for rest two cases the applicants have preferred applications for grant of bail before this Court which have been listed and being allowed today, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicants and the co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 06.03.2025 and 21.03.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 1861/2025 and 2277/2025, the applicants are in jail since 29.11.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicants, Zarif Ullah Ansari and Asfaq Ullah , involved in Crime No. 650/2024, registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District – Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 506 and 34 of the IPC and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with 4 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 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Rajshekhar Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice