Chattisgarh High Court
Lakhan Soni vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 January, 2025
Author: Narendra Kumar Vyas
Bench: Narendra Kumar Vyas
1
2025:CGHC:4320
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 203 of 2025
Lakhan Soni S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Soni Aged About 35 Years R/o
Address- 59, Employees Colony, Kalapipal Mandi, District- Shajapur, (M.P.)
(In Jail)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Tilda
Newra, District- Raipur (C.G.)
... Respondent
For Applicant : Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate.
For Respondent : Ms. M. Asha, Panel Lawyer.
Hon’ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
Order on Board
23/01/2025
1. This is the first bail application iled under Section 483 of the Bhartiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the
applicant who has been arrested on 21.05.2022 in connection with
Crime No. 176/2017 registered at Police Station- Tilda Newra, District-
Raipur (C.G.), for the ofences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 34
of IPC and Sections 4, 5 and 6 of Price Chit Fund and Money
Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 and Section 10 of
Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the applicant, as the Formal
Director of Nirmal Infra Home Corporation Limited, accepted deposits
from various customers under recurring/fixed deposit schemes and
bond schemes, but failed to return the amounts as promised. Since the
company was not authorized by the Securities and Exchange Board of
India (SEBI) or the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to conduct such
business, offences were committed under Sections 420, 409, and 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Prize Chit Funds
Digitally
signed by
ARUN
ARUN KUMAR
KUMAR DEWANGAN
DEWANGAN Date:
2025.01.24
12:17:04
+0530
2and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, and Section 10
of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors’ Interest Act, 2005.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is
innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case.
He submits that the present applicant has 08 criminal antecedents and
co-accused person namely Prabal Pratap Singh Yadav, has already
granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.08.2024 in MCRC No.
4794/2024. He would further submit that the applicant has also been
granted bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
02.01.2025, 06.01.2025, 10.01.2025, 10.01.2025, 10.01.2025 in
MCRC No. 9034/2024, MCRC No. 9020/2024, MCRC No. 212/2025,
MCRC No. 198/2025 & MCRC No. 225/2024 respectively. He would
further submit that the applicant is in jail since 21.05.2022 and
conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for
grant of regular bail to the present applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposing the bail application
would submit that there is sufficient material on record to show
involvement of the applicant in the crime in question and would pray for
rejection of the bail application.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6. Considering the fact that co-accused namely Prabal Pratap Singh
Yadav, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated
22.08.2024 in MCRC No. 4794/2024, the applicant has also been
granted bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, he is in jail since
21.05.2022, looking to the period of detention of the present applicant,
this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be
released on bail in this case.
7. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing 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
3treat 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 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
concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge
Arun