Raghvendra Jaiswal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

2025:CGHC:12794

NAFR

PRIYANKA VERMA

Digitally signed by PRIYANKA VERMA Date: 2025.03.18 18:03:24 +0530

¶6

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

MCRC No. 1368 of 2025

¶8

Raghvendra Jaiswal S/o Late Shri Gajanand Jaiswal Aged About 39 Years R/o Pali, Police Station And Tahsil - Pali, Civil And Revenue District - Korba (C.G.).

¶9

... Applicant

¶10

versus

¶11

State of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In-Charge Police Station - Patthalgaon, District - Jashpur (C.G.).

¶12

... Respondent

¶13

For Applicant	: Mr.	Kripesh G. Kela, Advocate
For State	: Mr.	Dilman Rati Minj, GA

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari

Order On Board

18/03/2025

1. Heard.

2. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant

¶19

2

¶20

who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 173/2014 registered at Police Station Patthalgaon for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the IPC.

¶21

3. Prosecution case, in brief, is that complainant, Shivacharan Kosta working as the Executive Engineer of the Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Ltd. (for short, “CSPDCL”) lodged an FIR at Police Station Patthalgaon that the present applicant along with other coaccused namely, Pankaj Kumar Kela and Amit Kumar Jaiswal has committed forgery by using a forged ID and password of Assistant Engineer and Executive Engineer and without sanction of any estimate, produced the fake bills to the tune of Rs.5,67,000/-, Rs.4,86,000/- and Rs.10,53,000/- and thereby withdrawn the amount of Rs.21,06,000/- and thus, caused loss to CSPDCL. During investigation, on 08.12.2015, coaccused Pankaj Kumar Kela was arrested and the present applicant and Amit Kumar Jaiswal were absconded, and thereafter, the charge sheet was filed on 05.03.2018 and Amit Kumar Jaiswal was arrested on 02.03.2023.

¶22

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He submits that in the year 2012, the applicant financed a Bolero vehicle bearing Registration No. CG12 R 5256 from Cholamandalam Finance Company. In the year 2013, the said vehicle was given on hire basis to the CSPDCL through one of his relatives, namely Pankaj Kumar Kela. He further submits that Pankaj Kumar Kela asked the applicant that whenever any amount is transferred to his account in excess, the applicant should withdraw the

¶23

3

¶24

said excess amount and transfer it to him in cash or to the person authorised by him. Learned counsel submits that as per the instruction of the main accused, Pankaj Kumar Kela, the applicant has transferred Rs.1,90,000/- to the account of one Ghanshyam Vidhwani, who was a partner of Pankaj Kumar Kela and also transferred Rs.4,60,000/- and Rs.3,68,000/- on 30.12.2013 and 01.01.2014, respectively, to the account of Sunita Lalwani, who is the sister-in-law of Ghanshyam Vidhwani. He would submit that a false case has been registered by the Police against him. He further submits that in the account of Amit Kumar Jaiswal, certain amount has been transferred through RTGS from the account of the CSPDCL.

¶25

5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that similar nature of three other offences have also been registered against him and in all three cases, he has been enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 28.07.2021, 09.09.2021 and 07.09.2022 passed in MCRCA No.168/2021, MCRCA No.1022/2021 and MCRCA No.716/2022 respectively, by this Court. He would further submit that the other similarly situated co-accused persons namely, Pankaj Kumar Kela and Amit Kumar Jaiswal have already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 24.04.2018 and 27.06.2023 passed in MCRC No.1433/2018 and MCRC No.2732/2023, respectively. He would further submit that the offence has been registered at Police Station Patthalgaon and Pankaj Kumar Kela and Amit Kumar Jaiswal were acquitted of the charges vide judgment dated 03.08.2024 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patthalgaon

¶26

4

¶27

in Criminal Case No.35/2016. Learned counsel prays for extending the benefit of Section 483 of the BNSS Act, 2023 to the applicant also.

¶28

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the aforesaid submission. He would fairly submit that the case of the present applicant is similar to the case of the other co-accused Amit Kumar Jaiswal who has been given the benefit of bail.

¶29

7. When a query has been put to the counsel for the State as to whether any Appeal has been preferred against the judgment of the acquittal, he is not aware of the same. When a further query has been put to the counsel for the State, as in the trial Court in the judgment dated 03.08.2024, it is materially observed that even the prosecution fails to prove the account in which the amount has been credited from the account of the CSPDCL during the trial, so it is expected from the counsel for the State to bring such negligence to the notice of higher officer of the concerned prosecution agency.

¶30

8. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, particularly considering the judgment of acquittal passed for the similar crime against the other co-accused and other similarly situated coaccused were also enlarged on bail during trial, though a certain amount has been credited to his account and conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

¶31

9. Accordingly, the Application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of

¶32

5

¶33

the trial Court. The applicant shall also furnish the details of movable and immovable properties held by him and his family members viz. wife & dependent children and shall not alienate the immovable property without the prior permission of the concerned trial Court.

¶34

10. Certified copy as per rules.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge

¶37

Priyanka

Raghvendra Jaiswal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghvendra Jaiswal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mp.State Elect.Board Headqu. Jabalpur Vs Mahesh Kumar Sharma

Smriti Tripathi Vs Secretary

Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Company Limited Vs Premin Verma

Bed Prasad Vs Sondha Alias Sunder And Ors.

Raman Kumar Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Limited Vs Dasodiya Bai