Ranchi (Jharkhand) v. State of Chhattisgarh Through
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:19393 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2875 of 2025 Navneet Kumar Pandey S/o Shri Kameshwar Pandey Aged About 52 Years R/o Flat No.- 02(D) Shivam Garden, Phase-1 Kilburn Colony, Hinu Doranda (Ranchi), P.S- Doranda, Distt- Ranchi (Jharkhand) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House OfÏcer, P.S- Chirmiri, Distt- Manendragarh-Chrimiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
ofÏcer, or director of the said company, prima facie offenses are not made out against him. He also submits that after investigation, the police filed a closure report before the learned Magistrate, stating that there was no evidence or documents on record to suggest that the instant crime was committed by the company. However, solely based on a false case registered against the applicant at P.S. Gandhi Nagar against the director and other employees of the said company, the police arrested the applicant. After filing the closure report in the instant crime (No. 71/2016, registered at P.S. Chirmiri), the police reopened the investigation and took the remand of the present applicant on 11.03.2025. He also submits that the present applicant is not an employee of the Welfare Building and Estate Private Limited Company, Branch Chirmiri, Dist. Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.), and therefore, there is no direct or indirect involvement of the present applicant in the present case. As per the written complaint, the allegations are only against the directors, employees, and ofÏcers of the Welfare Building and Estate Private Limited Company, Branch Chirmiri, Dist. Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.). Since the present applicant was not an employee, director, or ofÏcer of that branch, looking at the entire averment in the written complaint, there is no 4 role of the present applicant in the present case, and he has been falsely implicated. He also submits that the present applicant has 01 criminal antecedent except the present case which is also listed before the Hon’ble Court for hearing, the applicant is in jail since 11.03.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of offence and further the fact that the present applicant has only one criminal antecedent of the similar nature which is also listed today for hearing before this Court, except these cases the applicant has no criminal antecedents, also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant has been in jail since 11.03.2025 and the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Navneet Kumar Pandey, involved in Crime No. 71/2016 registered at Police Station : Chirmiri, District 5 Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 4, 5 of the Prize, Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Ke Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2005, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like amount 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 6 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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek
Arguments
: Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Adv. General. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.04.2025 1. 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. 71/2016 registered at Police Station : Chirmiri, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 4, 5 of the Prize, Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Ke ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.04.30 11:16:46 +0530 2 Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2005. 2. According to the prosecution's case, in 2016, the complainant, Babula Gond, lodged a complaint before the P.S. Chirmiri, alleging that the Welfare Building and Estate Private Limited Company, Branch Haldibari Chirmiri, enticed him to invest by promising to double his investment and pay higher interest. However, after receiving the amount from the complainant, the company failed to return the invested amount and committed a breach of trust. Based on the complaint, the police registered a crime against the ofÏcers/employees of the Welfare Building and Estate Private Limited on 20.02.2016. After completing the investigation, the police filed a closure report on 11.07.2017, before the competent Court. However, based on an order issued by the Superintendent of Police, the investigation was reopened on 15.07.2022. Subsequently, vide order dated 02.11.2024, the Superintendent of Police sent a letter to the Station House OfÏcer, P.S. Chirmiri, for arresting the accused/director of the said company. It is submitted that the present applicant was arrested by P.S. Gandhi Nagar, Ambikapur, in connection with Crime No. 519/2024, on 29.01.2025. Although the charge sheet has not been filed by the police, the case is pending before the Special Judge, Ambikapur. Additionally, on 11.03.2025, the police of P.S. Chirmiri took the applicant on remand in Crime No. 71/2016, registered at P.S. Chirmiri, Distt. Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.). 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is 3 innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the name of the present applicant is not mentioned in the FIR, which was registered by the police against the employees, directors, and ofÏcers of the Welfare Building and Estate Private Limited Company. Since the present applicant is not an employee,