Raigarh (C.G.) v. State of Chhattisgarh Through
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:25861 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4668 of 2025 Ranjit Kumar Chouhan S/o Nathuram Chouhan Aged About 29 Years R/o Dumarpali, P.S. Chakradhar Nagar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O., P.S. City Kotwali, Raigarh, Tahsil And District – Raigarh (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant For Non-applicant/State For Objector : : :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Ankit Singh, Advocate. Mr. Saumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Saxena, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 19.06.2025 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. 150/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, IPC). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that one complainant Anil Kumar Garg has lodged written report to the effect on 10.04.2025 that the applicant 2 who is the Co-Director of a NGO named Asim Kripa Foundation along with the present applicant stated that he on the year 2024 came to the complainant who is the CEO of Company named kamla Enterprises and stated that his NGO is authorized by Government and working for the benefit of needy people by providing them disposable item, stitching machine and sanitary pads machine etc and soon he will be getting Rs 9 crore for purchasing the same but in order to get that amount he need to show 12 lacs Rs into his bank account which he is getting short of and if the complainant will lend him that amount then the same will be adjusted by purchasing the item from complainant enterprises at the time he will receive 9 crore Rs and received the amount of Rs 12 lacs into his yuko bank account on 03/04/2024 and after sometime when the present applicant could be able to return the amount then he drawn a cheque of Rs 12 lacs to the complainant on 13.05.2025 which was dishonored twice on 15.05.2024 and when the complainant confronted regarding the same then again the present applicant drawn another cheque from his kotak mahindra bank on 18.05.2025 which was also dishonored then again he drawn another cheque of Rs 92,00,457/- on 05.06.2024 which was also dishonored, this is how the applicant along with the co-accused have cheated the complainant. Hence, this application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there are 2 criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant in which he has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that the co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 08.05.2025 passed in MCRCA No. 684/2025, and the applicant had also filed anticipatory bail which was dismissed as 3 infructuous by this Court vide order dated 22.05.2025 passed in MCRCA 765/2025, as the applicant was arrested by the Police. The applicant is in jail since 21.05.2025 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 as well as learned counsel for the objector opposed the bail application and submits that there are 2 criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that one complainant Anil Kumar Garg has lodged written report to the effect on 10.04.2025 that the applicant who is the Co-Director of a NGO named Asim Kripa Foundation along with the present applicant stated that he on the year 2024 came to the complainant who is the CEO of Company named kamla Enterprises and stated that his NGO is authorized by Government and working for the benefit of needy people by providing them disposable item, stitching machine and sanitary pads machine etc and soon he will be getting Rs 9 crore for purchasing the same but in order to get that amount he need to show 12 lacs Rs into his bank account which he is getting short of and if the complainant will lend him that amount then the same will be adjusted by purchasing the item from complainant enterprises at the time he will receive 9 crore Rs and received the amount of Rs 12 lacs into his yuko bank account on 03/04/2024 and after sometime when the present applicant could be able to return the amount then he drawn a cheque of Rs 12 lacs to the complainant on 13.05.2025 which was dishonored twice on 15.05.2024 and when the complainant confronted regarding the same then again the present applicant drawn another cheque from his kotak mahindra bank on 18.05.2025 which was also dishonored then again he drawn another cheque of Rs 92,00,457/- on 05.06.2024 which was also dishonored, this 5. 6. 4 is how the applicant along with the co-accused have cheated the complainant, therefore, he is 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 the fact that there are 2 criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant in which he has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, charge- sheet has been filed against the applicant, further the co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 08.05.2025 passed in MCRCA No. 684/2025, and the applicant had also filed anticipatory bail which was dismissed as infructuous by this Court vide order dated 22.05.2025 passed in MCRCA 765/2025, as the applicant was arrested by the Police, the applicant is in jail since 21.05.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Ranjit Kumar Chouhan, involved in Crime No. 150/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the 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. 5 (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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar