1 - Raju Singh S/o Harpal Singh Aged About 35 Years R/o Emliduggu, Bypass v. 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Sakti
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:23837 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4453 of 2025 1 - Raju Singh S/o Harpal Singh Aged About 35 Years R/o Emliduggu, Bypass Road, P.S. - Kotwali, District - Korba (C.G.). ... applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Sakti, District - Sakti (C.G.). ... Non-applicant For Applicant :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate For Res/State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Deputy Government Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 13/06/2025 Order on Board 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. 7/2025 registered at Police Station- Sakti District- Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 111(B), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 6 & 10 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the company’s director 2 namely- Akhilesh Singh, through Flora Maz Service Private Limited Company, in a planned manner, by luring people of Shakti and nearby villages with high profits and commission, made around 150 people deposti money at the rate of Rs. 30-40 thousand per person and by promising to give Rs. 2700/- per month and commission, committed fraud of Rs. 45,30,000 and then absconded by closing the office of the said company. Thereafter, after investigation, the accused has been charged as aforementioned and subsequently, he was arrested. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that the applicant is brother of co- accused, Akhilesh Singh, who is the main accused / director of company the investors who used invest in the company by selling the materials of the company and the amount which the investors invested for the material they used to received the amount and after selling those items the investors gave the selling amount to the company and from that amount the investors used to received Rs. 2700/- to 3000/- monthly or Rs. 100/- daily as profit and all the investors have received their profit. He also submits that co-accused, Gudiya Devi and Manju Chauhan have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 21.04.2025 & 02.01.2025 in MCRC Nos. 2647/2025 & 8976/2024. The applicant is in jail since 24.01.2025, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has four criminal antecedents, out of which, against three cases applicant has preferred 3 bail applications bearing MCRC Nos. 4440/2025, 4438/2025, 4454 of 2025 which are also listed today, further the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, 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 the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the accused, alongwith others, formed groups of women and obtained amount of Rs.30,000 to 40,000/- per person for their business with a promise to pay them Rs. 2,700/- monthly salary. These women's groups were made to operate shops at different locations, and daily transactions were carried out. However, the director of the company, Akhilesh Singh, kept the income generated from these shops and did not pay the women their monthly salary of Rs. 2,700/-. Further applicant has four criminal antecedents of identical nature, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bails of identical nature, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 24.01.2025 the fact that the applicant is the brother of co-accused Akhilesh Singh and the present applicant alongwith other co-accused persons were allegedly formed a group of women to operate shops at different locations, and obtained amount of Rs.30,000 to 40,000/- each for their business and later on Akhilesh Singh who is the director of the 5. 6. 4 said company kept the income generated from these shops and did not pay the women their monthly salary of Rs. 2,700/-, the main accused in present case is Akhilesh Singh, who committed the alleged act, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has four criminal antecedents, out of which, against three cases applicant has preferred bail applications bearing applicant has four criminal antecedents, out of which, against three cases applicant has preferred bail applications bearing MCRC Nos. 4440/2025, 4438/2025, 4454 of 2025 which are also listed today and the same are allowed today itself by this Court, further charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant- Raju Singh, involved in Crime No. 7/2025 registered at Police Station- Sakti District- Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 111(B), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 6 & 10 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 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 5 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 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. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Amita AMITA DUBEY Digitally signed by AMITA DUBEY Date: 2025.06.16 14:55:56 +0530