• Amit Sharma S/o Late Vinod Sharma Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No v. • State Of Chhattisgarh Through, S.H.O. Amanaka District- Raipur
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:15297 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2547 of 2025 • Amit Sharma S/o Late Vinod Sharma Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No. - 10, Gobra, Nawapara, Distt.- Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through, S.H.O. Amanaka District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, Advocate For : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Non-applicant/State Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01/04/2025 1. This is 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 432/2024 registered at Police Station Amanaka, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340, 3(5) of 2 BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant has lodged written report that he lives in Bilaspur and engaged in the business of property dealing and he has contacted to Raja singh through phone and put his desire to meet with the land owner and willing to purchase the land area 04 acre and 35 dismill situated near tatibandh and as per the instruction of the Raja Singh he reached to the Raipur where Raja singh was accompanied with Anand Gangde @ Neeraj and both of them have introduced Manju Devi agrawal as owner thereafter they have executed sale deed and complainant has given 5 lakh as a token money to the Manju Devi on dated 17/10/2024 and when the complainant has asked for the demarcation then the mobile of the Anand was switch off and thereafter Raja singh has again introduced complainant to the Hari sinha an on the instruction of Hari sinha again the complainant has transfer 5 lakh Rs. in the account of Manju Devi and when the paper publication was done meanwhile the original owner of the land has objected and after perusing the original record the complainant has realized that he has been cheated. Based on the complainant's written complaint, a case was registered at Police Station Aamanaka, District Raipur, under Crime No. 432/2024 for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340 and 3(5) of the BNS and the charge-sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been 3 falsely implicated in offence in question. The applicant is in jail since 10.12.2024. The charge-sheet has been filed and no further investigation is required, however, conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. He further submitted that co- accused namely Rakesh Kansari has already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court in M.Cr.C. No. 2454 of 2025 vide order dated 27.03.2025 and as such, on the ground of parity, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that according to charge-sheet applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, looking to the overt act application may be reject. 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, the fact that the conclusion of the trial may take some time and further that one of the co-accused namely Rakesh Kansari has already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court in M.Cr.C. No. 2454 of 2025 vide order dated 27.03.2025, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant- Amit Sharma, involved in Crime No. 432/2024 registered at Police Station Amanaka, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340 and 3(5) of of BNS, be released on bail on his 4 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 sufficient 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 sufficient 5 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial in accordance with law within a period of six months , if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.04.02 11:41:29 +0530 vaishali