Chattisgarh High Court
Basant Jain vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 June, 2025
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2025:CGHC:23825
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 4452 of 2025
Basant Jain S/o Late Manaklal Jain Aged About 60 Years R/o House No.-103,
Alakhnanda Tower, Ward No.-59, Deendayal Upadhyay Nagar, Raipur,
District - Raipur (C.G.).
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Telibandha, Raipur, District -
Raipur (C.G.).
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate
For Res/State : Dr. Saurbh Pande, Deputy Advocate General
For Res./Objector : Mr. Shivam Agrawal, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
13.06.2025
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.
532/2024 registered at Police Station : Telibandha Raipur, District-
Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420,468, 471,
2
2. According to the prosecution’s story, on 12.08.2024 an FIR was lodged
by complainant namely- Vikas Singh Thakur stating therein that the
present applicant alongwith other co-accused persons fraudulent
manner has prepared the forge documents and work orders related to
the installation of street lights and has obtained Rs. 24 lacs in different
dates i.e. Rs. 7 Lacs on 03.12.2022, Rs. 14 lacs on 07.12.2022 and on
23.12.2022 from the complainant in the name of getting the
government contract for the installation of street lights in the different
villages. Thereafter, neither the contract was allotted to the complainant
nor any amount had returned back to the complainant. Therefore, the
report has been lodged. Based on the police investigation, aforesaid
offenses has been registered against the present applicant. Hence this
bail application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He
would also submit that the applicant is an old person aged about 60
years of age and the civil and money dispute has been given the cloak
of the criminal offence. He would further submit that the matter has
been compromised between the applicant and the complainant and the
applicant’s son has also roped in the present case just for pressurising
the applicant to get money back to the complainant. He would again
submit that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail
since 17.04.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore,
he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant.
3
4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application
of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been
filed and the son of the present applicant is also involved in the offence
in question, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular
bail.
5. Mr. Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the objector would submit
that a compromise has been taken place between the present
applicant and the complainant and some of the amount has been
received by him from the applicant.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
7. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity
of offence and further the fact that the applicant has no criminal
antecedents and he is an old person aged about 60 years particularly
considering the fact that a compromised has been taken place between
the present applicant and the complainant and further, the charge-
sheet has been filed, the present applicant has been in jail since
17.04.2025, the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion,
therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be
released on bail in this case.
8. Let applicant- Basant Jain, involved in Crime No. 532/2024 registered
at Police Station : Telibandha Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Sections 420,468, 471, 34, 201 of Indian
Penal Code, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond
4
with two sureties in the like amount 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 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
5court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and
proceed against him in accordance with law.
9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court
concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Amita
AMITA Digitally signed by
AMITA DUBEY
DUBEY Date: 2025.06.16
15:07:28 +0530