Chattisgarh High Court
Jay Kumar Nara @ Jay Nara vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 May, 2025
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2025:CGHC:22011
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 3848 of 2025
• Jay Kumar Nara @ Jay Nara S/o Late Ramesh Kumar Nara @ Late
Ramesh Nara Aged About 37 Years R/o House No. 17, Maruti
Residency, Mayur Vihar, Amlidih, New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur
(Wrongly Mentioned As Mahavir Nagar) District Raipur (C.G.)
... Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Civil Line, District Raipur (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. B.L. Dembra, Advocate
For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sanjeev Pandey,
Deputy Advocate General
For Objector : Mr. Syed Ishhadil Ali, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
Digitally
signed by
RAMESH 13/05/2025
KUMAR
VATTI
1.
The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section
483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular
bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 48/2025,
registered at Police Station – Civil Line, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of Indian
Penal Code, for short, the IPC.
2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant Shiv Kumar
Agrawal lodged a written complaint in Police Station Civil Line on
2
08.01.2025 alleging that the applicant has instigated the complainant to
invest money. It is alleged that the complainant has deposited the
amount of Rs.25 lacs in the account of main accused Kanhaiyalal
Chhadda in the year 2022. It is further alleged that an agreement was
also executed between the said Kanhaiyalal Chhadda and the
complainant. It is alleged that the wife of complainant is suffering from
disease, therefore, the complainant has not lodged the instant report
earlier. On the basis of above written complaint made by the
complainant, the applicant was arrested by the Police and the
aforesaid offence has been registered.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is
submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is also
submitted that earlier also the complainant lodged a report against the
applicant and other co-accused bearing Crime No. 436/2022 in Police
Station New Rajendra Nagar, Raipu in which he has been granted bail
by the coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 28.07.2023
passed in M.Cr.C. No. 2405/2023 and other connected matters and
after lapse of 03 years, the complainant has lodged the instant report
against the applicant. It is further submitted that there is no criminal
antecedent of the applicant, and he is in jail since 21.02.2025 and the
conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he
prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the State as well
as learned counsel appearing for the objector opposes the bail
application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the
present case, however, they submit that there is no criminal antecedent
3
of the applicant. It is submitted that earlier the complainant lodged a
report against the applicant and co-accused which was registered as
Crime No. 436/2022 in Police Station New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur,
therefore, this bail application is liable to be rejected.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
available on record.
6. After hearing the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the
parties as well as considering the fact that charge-sheet has been filed,
there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant as stated by learned
counsel for the State and the applicants is in jail since 21.02.2025.
Further that the complainant lodged a report against the applicant and
other co-accused, in which the applicant has already been granted bail
by the coordinate bench of this Court and the conclusion of the trial is
likely to take sometime, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled
to be released on bail in this case.
7. Let the applicant, Jay Kumar Nara @ Jay Nara involved in Crime No.
48/2025, registered at Police Station – Civil Line, District – Raipur
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section
34 of IPC, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with
two local 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
4counsel. 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make
earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within
a period of six months from the date of passing of this order, if there is
no legal impediment.
9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
vatti
[ad_1]
Source link