Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:33843 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5621 of 2025 Akash Shrivastava S/o Late Shri Narendra Kumar Shrivastava, Aged About 34 Years R/o Aq9, Science College Campus, Near Nit Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. versus ... Applicant State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Saraswati Nagar, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Amrito Das, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 17/07/2025 Order on Board 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. 51/2025 registered at Police Station- Saraswati Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 316(5), 336(3) and 340(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the applicant, while serving as Assistant Grade-III in the Department of Higher Education, RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Chhattisgarh, fraudulently committed financial irregularities by forging bills and diverting the corresponding amounts into his own bank account, as well as into the accounts of daily wage workers, namely Vedeshwari Nirmalkar, Komal Kumar, Khilawan Joshi, Ajay Kumar Tandon, and Bhupendra Kumar. The total amount alleged to have been embezzled by the applicant is INR 18,55,289/-. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to baseless, malicious, and vengeful allegations made by certain co-workers and one Dr. Kiran Gajpal, solely because the applicant was posted in the Regional Office of the Higher Education Department, Chhattisgarh. The FIR lodged under Section 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is a result of a pre-planned and unilateral enquiry conducted without affording the applicant any opportunity to be heard. The memorandum statement attributed to the applicant is fabricated, and none of the seized articles establish any direct involvement in the alleged offence. He further submits that the financial transactions reflected in the Applicant’s bank account pertain to legitimate reimbursements for office expenses incurred by the applicant. Further, the applicant has recently undergone surgery on his left shoulder and is in urgent need of medical supervision, making continued incarceration detrimental to his health. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 23.03.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long 3 time for its conclusion, 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 applicants and submits that the charge- sheet has been submitted in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant, while serving as Assistant Grade-III in the Department of Higher Education, Chhattisgarh, fraudulently committed financial irregularities by forging bills and diverting the corresponding amounts into his own bank account, as well as into the accounts of daily wage workers, namely Vedeshwari Nirmalkar, Komal Kumar, Khilawan Joshi, Ajay Kumar Tandon, and Bhupendra Kumar. The total amount alleged to have been embezzled by the applicant is INR 18,55,289/-, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 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, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the allegations arise out of financial transactions which, as per the applicant, relate to office reimbursements, further considering that the departmental enquiry appears to have been conducted unilaterally without affording the applicant an opportunity of hearing, and that the applicant has recently undergone surgery on his left shoulder and requires medical supervision; also noting that the charge sheet has already 4 been filed, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and he is in jail since 30.05.2025, and that the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application deserve to be and are hereby allowed. 7. Let the applicant, Akash Shrivastava, involved in Crime No. 51/2025 registered at Police Station- Saraswati Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 316(5), 336(3) and 340(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing 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 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 5 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Rahul Dewangan Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice